Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 74 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Personality Type, by Lenore Thomson, page 86- (Google books)

"The four functions between our strongest (the captain and the petty officer) and our weakest (the water-skier and would-be captain) have their own roles on our typological ship. But the best way to see how they work is to introduce a specific example. Grant, a fifty-nine-year-old ESTJ, had been an accountant for thirty years in a church-related lending institution. This is Grant's type lasagna - with the four additional functions sandwiched in the middle:

dominant: Te
secondary: Si
left-brain alternatives: Fe, Ni
right-brain double agents: Se, Ti
tertiary: Ne
inferior: Fi"

Lenore Thomson's model of the functions support Socionics Model A in terms of strength and value, right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,511 Posts
Jungian cognitive functions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.typology central dot com/forums/archive/index.php/t-24118.html

"I MUCH prefer Lenore Thomson's function orderings. I mean, are you going to claim that Ne and Fi are 3rd and 4th for an ESTJ? I mean... really?!?

Her ordering for an ESTJ is Te Si Fe Ni Se Ti Ne Fi

This makes far more sense to me. I think an ESTJ is much more likely to be in tune with expected social rituals, holidays, etc (Fe stuff), but look upon doing things "because they are right for you" (Fi reasoning) with grave suspicion."

I agree 100%.

The order of the functions corresponds with Socionics Model A, if the ESTJ example is correct. But is it?
I am not so concerned about orderings as I am about the role or function it plays in the psyche. I personally don't think Lenore's model makes sense, at least compared to Beebe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
For me, "ESTJs have more Fe than Fi" is a very simplistic view. Unlike any MBTI function ordering, Socionics distinguishes function strength from function value. In Socionics, LSEs are, like all extroverts, more competent in Fe than Fi, but as Te-egos they do not want to deal with Fe and find it exhausting and instead value Fi as a supplement to Te. Unidimensional MBTI orderings do not touch upon those aspects and just define functions quantitatively instead of defining the roles that the functions serve to the mind. I personally find unifying MBTI with Socionics to be a pointless task, from which nothing good will come apart from more people hearing about MBTI getting into Socionics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I am not so concerned about orderings as I am about the role or function it plays in the psyche. I personally don't think Lenore's model makes sense, at least compared to Beebe.
The orderings IS about the role it plays in the psyche. Do you prefer Beebe over Socionics Model A?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
For me, "ESTJs have more Fe than Fi" is a very simplistic view. Unlike any MBTI function ordering, Socionics distinguishes function strength from function value. In Socionics, LSEs are, like all extroverts, more competent in Fe than Fi, but as Te-egos they do not want to deal with Fe and find it exhausting and instead value Fi as a supplement to Te. Unidimensional MBTI orderings do not touch upon those aspects and just define functions quantitatively instead of defining the roles that the functions serve to the mind. I personally find unifying MBTI with Socionics to be a pointless task, from which nothing good will come apart from more people hearing about MBTI getting into Socionics.

"as Te-egos the do not want to deal with Fe and find it exhausting and instead value Fi as a supplement to Te"

Yes they value Fi, but it is by no means easier for them to use it.


"Unidimensional MBTI orderings do not touch upon those aspects and just define functions quantitatively instead of defining the roles that the functions serve to the mind."

What model are you referring to? Beebe? The orderings determine their relative strength and whether the functions are conscious or unconscious. This will indirectly define their roles.


"I personally find unifying MBTI with Socionics to be a pointless task, from which nothing good will come apart from more people hearing about MBTI getting into Socionics."

I am actually trying to dismiss the Beebe model :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
"as Te-egos the do not want to deal with Fe and find it exhausting and instead value Fi as a supplement to Te"

Yes they value Fi, but it is by no means easier for them to use it.


"Unidimensional MBTI orderings do not touch upon those aspects and just define functions quantitatively instead of defining the roles that the functions serve to the mind."

What model are you referring to? Beebe? The orderings determine their relative strength and whether the functions are conscious or unconscious. This will indirectly define their roles.


"I personally find unifying MBTI with Socionics to be a pointless task, from which nothing good will come apart from more people hearing about MBTI getting into Socionics."

I am actually trying to dismiss the Beebe model :)
Strength ≠ value ≠ consciousness. There is more to function use than quantitative strength.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Discussion Starter #10 (Edited)
Lenore Thomson's Descriptions of Cognitive Functions (MBTI):

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/134-Lenore-Thomson-MBTI-Functions

Quasi-defining statements

p. 169: "When we use Introverted Sensation, we don't adjust to our surface perceptions. We package them and take them with us--in the form of facts, numbers, signs, and memories."

Does she imply that facts like "USA consists of 50 states" and "785 is a number" belong to Si?

Hmm... My father is an ISTJ and a friend of mine is ESTJ (and his father). ISTJs are pretty good with facts, but they are mostly concerned with comfort and quality. ESTJs are masters of Trivial Pursuit!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
260 Posts
It lacks the sophistication in Model A. Socionics can explain interpersonal relations because it can explicate the role of every IE. Your leading function is your fundamental identity, your role function is something you can do in small doses that makes you feel disoriented, your suggestive function is something you cannot do but something that complements your leading function when from another person, your demonstrative function is something you are good at but do not take seriously, etc. 'Tertiary' or 'left-brain alternative' is hardly as nuanced. If it were, it would be no different from Socionics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,511 Posts
The orderings IS about the role it plays in the psyche. Do you prefer Beebe over Socionics Model A?
Not in socionics. If socionics model only based the order of strength of use then estj is te si ti se first, because they are the sensation and logical elements that formulate the basis of the psyche, would one ignore I/e for a second. In terms of energy si is the same relative strength as se for the lse.

I like Beebe more because it's more about how we relate to the elements or functions than how strong or developed they are. I see an overlap with his archetypes and the socionics function roles. Hidden agenda as the eternal child for example.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,511 Posts
As for brain activity, I think lenore is potentially really off with that. Shouldn't I be left brained according to her because I have auxiliary te? How would I otherwise express the behavior of the j letter in my mbti typing? Yet I find myself strongly right brained. One can argue its the ni and I don't know which side she links to ni, but it doesn't matter. Her brain theory isn't sound and there is no evidence to support it.

Never mind the fact that modern neuroscience agrees on that left and right doesn't quite exist in that sense. We use both sides which depends on the task at hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Model A is crap where the last 2 functions (PoLR, Role) are considered unconscious and the tertiary and inferior unconscious based on Jungs wrong assumption that the inferior would be unconscious. Because he thought of it as the Anima/us which really is unconscious and lies in the opposite direction (Extroversion/Introversion) of the leading/dominant function.

Introverted: Ni - Ne; Si - Se; Ti - Te; Fi - Fe (conscious - unconscious; Ego - Anima/us)
Extroverted: Ne - Ni; Se - Si; Te - Ti; Fe - Fi (conscious - unconscious; Ego - Anima/us)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,511 Posts
Model A is crap where the last 2 functions (PoLR, Role) are considered unconscious and the tertiary and inferior unconscious based on Jungs wrong assumption that the inferior would be unconscious. Because he thought of it as the Anima/us which really is unconscious and lies in the opposite direction (Extroversion/Introversion) of the leading/dominant function.

Introverted: Ni - Ne; Si - Se; Ti - Te; Fi - Fe (conscious - unconscious; Ego - Anima/us)
Extroverted: Ne - Ni; Se - Si; Te - Ti; Fe - Fi (conscious - unconscious; Ego - Anima/us)
WTF have you been smoking? Jung is pretty clear on what is conscious-unconscious wherein it would be:

conscious- dominant auxiliary tertiary inferior - unconscious

The reason why Beebe enlists the anima complex for the inferior function in his model is because that's what Jung suggested too. If one is a dominant intuitive, then one is not unconscious Thinking or Feeling, since we would normally have either of them as an auxiliary since they do not consciously oppose the perspective of the dominant compared to the inferior. The simpler guideline is that the more conscious you are of something, the more unconscious you are of its opposite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
It lacks the sophistication in Model A. Socionics can explain interpersonal relations because it can explicate the role of every IE. Your leading function is your fundamental identity, your role function is something you can do in small doses that makes you feel disoriented, your suggestive function is something you cannot do but something that complements your leading function when from another person, your demonstrative function is something you are good at but do not take seriously, etc. 'Tertiary' or 'left-brain alternative' is hardly as nuanced. If it were, it would be no different from Socionics.
Did you read the book? (a third of the book is available on the Internet)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
Not in socionics. If socionics model only based the order of strength of use then estj is te si ti se first
I never said that... neither does John Beebe. There is a order of strength, yes, but it isn't from the strongest to the weakest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
As for brain activity, I think lenore is potentially really off with that. Shouldn't I be left brained according to her because I have auxiliary te? How would I otherwise express the behavior of the j letter in my mbti typing? Yet I find myself strongly right brained. One can argue its the ni and I don't know which side she links to ni, but it doesn't matter. Her brain theory isn't sound and there is no evidence to support it.

Never mind the fact that modern neuroscience agrees on that left and right doesn't quite exist in that sense. We use both sides which depends on the task at hand.

MBTI Brain Types | Lenore Thomson Bentz

LTB: The only purpose of the brain map is to show how type preference relates to what the brain actually does. It doesn't mean that preference is a predetermined neurological structure, and it doesn't mean that you can drill into the cranium and locate the functions, cradled happily in their separate quadrants. What I'm trying to indicate is that tasks associated with the various functions implicate different parts of the brain.

For example, if the left frontal lobe of the brain is anesthetized, discrimination and executive judgment are rendered impossible. The frontal cortex is crucial to the tasks we associate with Extraverted Thinking and Extraverted Feeling.

If the right back hemisphere is anesthetized instead, executive judgment remains possible, but it occurs without reference to real subjective experience, spatial awareness, and contextual evaluation -- aspects associated with Introverted Thinking and Introverted Feeling. Without this input, the left brain simply fabricates whatever appears to "explain" how consequence is related to cause.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
To my knowledge, Thomson's model is based on strength.
ESTJ

dominant: Te
secondary: Si
left-brain alternatives: Fe, Ni
right-brain double agents: Se, Ti
tertiary: Ne
inferior: Fi"

Do you think the left-brian alternatives are stronger than the right-brain double agents? That is not my interpretation. I think the order is like Beebe's model: first the strongest conscious function to the to weakest conscious function, then the strongest unconscious function to weakest unconscious function.
 
1 - 20 of 74 Posts
Top