Personality Cafe banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Here is my attempt:


Attitude (I or E): Energy focus: Intensive vs. Extensive

Perception (S or N): Information type: Concrete vs. Abstract

Judgement (T or F): Reasoning method: Absolute vs. Relative

Orientation (J or P): Primary combination: Pi-Je or Ji-Pe

---------------------

Making this true:

Ni: Intensive abstract information patterns
Ne: Extensive abstract information patterns
Si: Intensive concrete information patterns
Se: Extensive concrete information patterns
Ti: Intensive absolute reasoning patterns
Te: Extensive absolute reasoning patters
Fi: Intensive relative reasoning patterns
Fe: Extensive relative reasoning patterns

--------------------

Definitions:

"Intensive" meaning focused on what you have (what is stored in your brain already).
"Extensive" meaning focused on what is out there (what exists in the outside world).

"Relative" meaning what things are in relation to each other (Honesty > Winning).
"Absolute" meaning what things exist. Period. (1+1=2)

"Concrete" meaning what exists in material form (a tree)
"Abstract" meaning what exists as idea (the word "love" in a person's mind)

"Pi-Je" meaning using primarily introverted perceiving and extroverted judging (in any order).
"Ji-Pe" meaning using primarily introverted judging and extroverted perceiving (in any order).

--------------------

Thoughts:

Jung formulated some of his ideas aware of the theory of the unity of opposites first put forth by Heraclitus

All of the functions being some sort of pattern of either information or reasoning was a cool idea to me, but that may just be my intuition-soaked thinking leaking. It would be cool to see what any sensors out there think of that.

This requires some flexibility of thinking when it comes to the actual definition of words, but it helped me to look at the whole typing system as a system of dichotomous patterns.

I'm not fully happy with it, though, so some input would be appreciated!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
642 Posts
Nice! Here's how I (currently) see it:

E/I= Where you (instinctively/naturally) rely on:
E= Relies (instinctively/naturally) on a foundation of external information
I= Relies (instinctively/naturally) on a foundation of internal information

S/N= The part of reality you (instinctively/naturally) focus on:
S= Focuses (instinctively/naturally) on particular points
N= Focuses (instinctively/naturally) on general concepts

F/T= What kind of aspect you are (instinctively/naturally) influenced by:
F= (Instinctively/naturally) influenced by human aspects
T= (Instinctively/naturally) influenced by technical aspects

J/P= How deal (instinctively/naturally) with the imediate moment:
J= (Instinctively/naturally) deals with the imediate moment by directing information
P= (Instinctively/naturally) deals with the imediate moment by observing information
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,942 Posts
Honestly, I'm more of a fan of the axes than the dichotomies. When you look at Te+Fi (for example) as a single brain process, things start making a lot more sense.

Ni + Se: Collecting world sensations and organizing them into a framework, looking at the 'big picture' and not the details.
Si + Ne: Collecting information and organizing it while seeking out possibilities in the outside world.
Fi + Te: Formulating personal values and feelings in relation to outside rules and systems.
Ti + Fe: Formulating personal rules and systems in relation to outside social structures and values.

Of course there's a lot more subtlety to all this, but I've found that this works very well as a starting point for me personally. The dichotomies in my opinion don't really do justice to the fact that humans are very complicated creatures where every part of our cognition is interconnected. You can't just focus on one single aspect when they're not separate in practice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,082 Posts
Nice! Here's how I (currently) see it:

E/I= Where you (instinctively/naturally) rely on:
E= Relies (instinctively/naturally) on a foundation of external information
I= Relies (instinctively/naturally) on a foundation of internal information

S/N= The part of reality you (instinctively/naturally) focus on:
S= Focuses (instinctively/naturally) on particular points
N= Focuses (instinctively/naturally) on general concepts

F/T= What kind of aspect you are (instinctively/naturally) influenced by:
F= (Instinctively/naturally) influenced by human aspects
T= (Instinctively/naturally) influenced by technical aspects

J/P= How deal (instinctively/naturally) with the imediate moment:
J= (Instinctively/naturally) deals with the imediate moment by directing information
P= (Instinctively/naturally) deals with the imediate moment by observing information
I also think of the e/i as internal/external.

I tend to think of S/N as sense and explore. N explores either their own (internal) future, or it explores the workings of things and people around them (external). Se is the real "sense" one, that's too accurate to change. Si though, is more about organising information into a history of everything. That's pretty hard to put a label on for me.

J/P is a modifier, and isn't really a personality trait in itself as it just modifies the stack arrangement... J, is the planner. They have to make a plan to go from one side of the room to the other. P is reactive, and wouldn't make a plan to build a house. I wish they weren't J&P and P for planner is so easy to remember...

maybe J/P should be reaction / action?

Ni + Se: Collecting world sensations and organizing them into a framework, looking at the 'big picture' and not the details.
Si + Ne: Collecting information and organizing it while seeking out possibilities in the outside world.
Fi + Te: Formulating personal values and feelings in relation to outside rules and systems.
Ti + Fe: Formulating personal rules and systems in relation to outside social structures and values.
This seems pretty accurate as long as you're only talking about the two primary functions. INTP and ISFJ and ESFJ and ENTP for instance all use their Si + Ne combination very differently :D. Your description of it is most applicable to ESFJ, ISFJ, ENTP, INTP getting less applicable from left to right (as it's almost not applicable at all for me)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,942 Posts
This seems pretty accurate as long as you're only talking about the two primary functions. INTP and ISFJ and ESFJ and ENTP for instance all use their Si + Ne combination very differently :D. Your description of it is most applicable to ESFJ, ISFJ, ENTP, INTP getting less applicable from left to right (as it's almost not applicable at all for me)
I'll have to work on the wording then because it's definitely also applicable to how your brain works. Si/Ne for example is a continuum that goes from exploring ideas to structuring information. Everyone finds their own balance in that. I'll have to find a better descriptor for it though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
642 Posts
I also think of the e/i as internal/external.

I tend to think of S/N as sense and explore. N explores either their own (internal) future, or it explores the workings of things and people around them (external). Se is the real "sense" one, that's too accurate to change. Si though, is more about organising information into a history of everything. That's pretty hard to put a label on for me.
I think the difference between Pi and Pe is determined by whether the perception is based internally or externally (subject vs object) because, at least to me, organizing (or discriminating) information is related to the judging functions.


J/P is a modifier, and isn't really a personality trait in itself as it just modifies the stack arrangement... J, is the planner. They have to make a plan to go from one side of the room to the other. P is reactive, and wouldn't make a plan to build a house. I wish they weren't J&P and P for planner is so easy to remember...

maybe J/P should be reaction / action?
I guess it could be? It's a bit hard to define J/P dichotomies without using either the function stack (Je-Pi vs Pe-Ji) or stereotypes ("strict" vs "scattered").
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,082 Posts
I'll have to work on the wording then because it's definitely also applicable to how your brain works. Si/Ne for example is a continuum that goes from exploring ideas to structuring information. Everyone finds their own balance in that. I'll have to find a better descriptor for it though.
Ti+Ne doesn't always structure and store all the information it takes in. Ne can find ideas about how something works, then Ti can say "nope that seems false", and then it never gets to the Si at all. So Ne+Ti can work together without Si getting involved. So if you ignore the Ti truth gate, yes Ne+Si works exactly as you're saying... but that doesn't really describe an actual process that happens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,082 Posts
I'll have to work on the wording then because it's definitely also applicable to how your brain works. Si/Ne for example is a continuum that goes from exploring ideas to structuring information. Everyone finds their own balance in that. I'll have to find a better descriptor for it though.
Ti+Ne doesn't always structure and store all the information it takes in. Ne can find ideas about how something works, then Ti can say "nope that seems false", and then it never gets to the Si at all. So Ne+Ti can work together without Si getting involved. So if you ignore the Ti truth gate, yes Ne+Si works exactly as you're saying... but that doesn't really describe an actual process that happens. Well.. in the order it happens.

edit: I would say most people use their two dominant functions without their third getting involved every time (or being a dominant influence if you want to put it that way). And if Si is the inferior function like in ENTP, they go out of their way to never store the information Ne provides. They just think "Why would I do that, it might change later". Which is why they trip over the same crack in the sidewalk on the way to school every day for years.

edit: edit: also there is nothing abstract about Ne. Ne is the part of you that wants to work out how stuff works. If you have an idea Ne says "how would all the pieces of this idea come together". Dominant Ne users want to cut open things to see how it works, they want to pull apart the clock and see the gears turning :D. You could argue that Ni is abstract in a way, as it's supposition based on supposition, generally affected by all the imagined cogs of the universe. Still not really what I consider abstract, but I get that. Ne to me seems the opposite of abstract in every way I think of it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,423 Posts
Yeah, why not.

Observation vs Introspection
Concrete vs Abstract
Detachment vs Emotion
Organised vs Adaptable

---

Potential
Causation
Want
Impression
Effeciency
Coherence
Vibrance
Sentiment
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,942 Posts
Ti+Ne doesn't always structure and store all the information it takes in. Ne can find ideas about how something works, then Ti can say "nope that seems false", and then it never gets to the Si at all. So Ne+Ti can work together without Si getting involved. So if you ignore the Ti truth gate, yes Ne+Si works exactly as you're saying... but that doesn't really describe an actual process that happens. Well.. in the order it happens.

edit: I would say most people use their two dominant functions without their third getting involved every time (or being a dominant influence if you want to put it that way). And if Si is the inferior function like in ENTP, they go out of their way to never store the information Ne provides. They just think "Why would I do that, it might change later". Which is why they trip over the same crack in the sidewalk on the way to school every day for years.

edit: edit: also there is nothing abstract about Ne. Ne is the part of you that wants to work out how stuff works. If you have an idea Ne says "how would all the pieces of this idea come together". Dominant Ne users want to cut open things to see how it works, they want to pull apart the clock and see the gears turning :D. You could argue that Ni is abstract in a way, as it's supposition based on supposition, generally affected by all the imagined cogs of the universe. Still not really what I consider abstract, but I get that. Ne to me seems the opposite of abstract in every way I think of it.
Thank you for this. It actually explains a lot of things I never understood about the INTP mind in relation to the theory. As an INFJ, my Ti is always struggling a bit, which means it's hard to get a good feel for how it works in Ti-doms.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,082 Posts
Thank you for this. It actually explains a lot of things I never understood about the INTP mind in relation to the theory. As an INFJ, my Ti is always struggling a bit, which means it's hard to get a good feel for how it works in Ti-doms.
I think I can explain Ne even better now, on discord I used a table tennis analogy that somebody liked so I'll try and remember that.

when playing table tennis I use a lot of muscle memory (Si), all those things like how to hold myself, how to move my arm/hand to put different forces on the ball etc. But I use Ne to gather the real world information, not so much the physical characteristics of stuff but the technical details. A game to me is almost like watching the inside of a stopwatch with cogs turning. All the pieces move and trigger reactions, upon reactions, upon reactions. The player moves in this direction (Ne), his hand moved in that direction(Ne) which will encounter ball (Ti) moving in this direction spinning x ways (Ne). The new contact of ball+bat will create this much force (Ti) to override spin. Then the ball gets hit and Ne confirms what's actually happening again. The relationship between Ne and Ti is smooth, they think as one.

The Ti seems to be like the general commanding the army. To continue the table tennis analogy the Ti doesn't really do anything except give orders. Ne brings data, Ti then says Okay with this data, you need to be standing over there to return the shot, and then it turns to Si and says "Okay, NOW! FIRE" and Si kind of uses muscle memory to play the shot, it knows I'm standing in the correct place as Ti told it where it needs to be based on Ne observations about where the ball was going to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
349 Posts
Ti+Ne doesn't always structure and store all the information it takes in. Ne can find ideas about how something works, then Ti can say "nope that seems false", and then it never gets to the Si at all. So Ne+Ti can work together without Si getting involved. So if you ignore the Ti truth gate, yes Ne+Si works exactly as you're saying... but that doesn't really describe an actual process that happens. Well.. in the order it happens.

edit: I would say most people use their two dominant functions without their third getting involved every time (or being a dominant influence if you want to put it that way). And if Si is the inferior function like in ENTP, they go out of their way to never store the information Ne provides. They just think "Why would I do that, it might change later". Which is why they trip over the same crack in the sidewalk on the way to school every day for years.

edit: edit: also there is nothing abstract about Ne. Ne is the part of you that wants to work out how stuff works. If you have an idea Ne says "how would all the pieces of this idea come together". Dominant Ne users want to cut open things to see how it works, they want to pull apart the clock and see the gears turning :D. You could argue that Ni is abstract in a way, as it's supposition based on supposition, generally affected by all the imagined cogs of the universe. Still not really what I consider abstract, but I get that. Ne to me seems the opposite of abstract in every way I think of it.
Bold sounds way more like Ti to me. Ne is ideas and information, but wanting to know how things work, pulling apart, and see things turning, that sounds like Ti.

Ne
How Functions Work: Dominant Ne (ENTP/ENFP) - Type Theory

How Functions Work: Auxiliary Ne (INTP/INFP) - Type Theory

Ti
How Functions Work: Dominant Ti (ISTP/INTP) - Type Theory

How Functions Work: Auxiliary Ti (ESTP/ENTP) - Type Theory

Ne is abstract in the way it sees possibilities that don't exist yet. It is more likely to entertain possibilities that can never exist, or are unlikely to, like theoretical, or unrealistic, where as sensors are more likely to want ideas to be practical.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,082 Posts
Bold sounds way more like Ti to me. Ne is ideas and information, but wanting to know how things work, pulling apart, and see things turning, that sounds like Ti.
Yes see my latest post to see what I currently think about Ne.

please note... dominant Ne children will take a clock apart to see how it works, because they don't think about putting it back together. This is true for Ne who don't have Ti, their Te still wants to know. Dominant Ti children don't do this, their Ti has strong risk assessment and does think about putting it back together after they finish pulling it apart.

It may not be Ne which decides anything, but merely the presence of the information that Ne provides that compels Ti or Te to apply logic to the information of things working around them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
Let's try

Introverted functions= Subjective Reality
Extroverted functions= Objective Reality

Feeling Functions: Emotional Based Reasoning
Thinking Functions: Logical Based Reasoning

Intuitive Functions: Collecting Data from abstract patterns
Sensing Functions: Collecting Data from concrete patterns
----------------------------------
Fi: Subjective Emotional Based Reasoning
Fe: Objective Emotional Based Reasoning
Ti: Subjective Logical Based Reasoning
Te: Objective Logical Based Reasoning
Si: Subjective Collector of data from concrete patterns.
Se: Objective Collector of data from concrete patterns.
Ni: Subjective Collector of data from abstract patterns
Ne: Objective Collector of data from abstract patterns
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
349 Posts
Yes see my latest post to see what I currently think about Ne.

please note... dominant Ne children will take a clock apart to see how it works, because they don't think about putting it back together. This is true for Ne who don't have Ti, their Te still wants to know. Dominant Ti children don't do this, their Ti has strong risk assessment and does think about putting it back together after they finish pulling it apart.

It may not be Ne which decides anything, but merely the presence of the information that Ne provides that compels Ti or Te to apply logic to the information of things working around them.
I'm still not sure that updated info screams Ne to me, but Ne does pay attention to what grabs it's attention, so could be, at the very least Ne+another function.

I can't speak for all Ne doms, but my Ne dom sibling never did any of that stuff. XD

Yes, Ne definitely sucks up information, so that makes sense.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top