Personality Cafe banner
1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Ti: years ago, I fell in love with computer science. I still love data structures, compiler design, and assembly code; I graduated near the top of my class. I also lived and breathed computer code for several years.

Fi: there is no place on the planet that fits my values like the University of Notre Dame; the university's interest in academics and sports (especially football) fits me to a 'tee.' Add in the notion of religion and God and you have almost everything I value. Even my interest in the 1970s fits; that decade was a golden era for Notre Dame football. The one thing that is different is that I love the humorous side of things. If Notre Dame had the humorous side, it would have everything I value- with Boston College and Georgetown not far behind...

Anyway, you can see my issues with the MBTI; assume I am like Notre Dame in personality type; if I am 'Fi,' what about my strong backbone in academics? If I am 'Ti,' what about the ethical/religious side? And, if I am intuitive, what about the deep interest in sports - and therefore the sensory side of things? (E.g., "Touchdown Jesus.")

Now, I can imagine some people saying that money is what drives that place but I'm not sure that they are any different in that sense than Harvard or MIT, which people don't necessarily view the same way...

Anyway, your opinions please...
 

·
Registered
ENTJ 8w7
Joined
·
2,293 Posts
Anyway, you can see my issues with the MBTI
I don't see any issues. Falling in love with CS/anything doesn't make you Ti/T/anything. It tells me how you feel about those things if anything, which is a Feeling process.

if I am 'Fi,' what about my strong backbone in academics?
And what about it? How being Fi is supposed to contradict with strong backbones in whatever?

If I am 'Ti,' what about the ethical/religious side?
Religious/ethical/moral systems aren't about acting based on how you feel about things, those systems tend to be quite elaborate/philosophical and rule-based. Fi isn't equal to having principles/values/moral code.

And, if I am intuitive, what about the deep interest in sports - and therefore the sensory side of things? (E.g., "Touchdown Jesus.")
Well, you might be not as intuitive as you think, this is an option too.
 

·
Registered
Dreamer, sometimes awake. Creative Ti.
Joined
·
157 Posts
Let's say, both a Ti dom and an Fi dom engage in logical reasoning. The Ti dom does so because it is their default setting, and they don't choose to do so but are naturally inclined to use logical reasoning in making decisions. That is what comes to them, first and foremost. They don't tend to ask whether they trust reason or not, because they always do.

The Fi dom, on the other hand, may love logical reasoning and live a highly logically consistent life because that is their preference. They may believe that logic is the best tool in problem-solving, so they choose to trust logic and want to be as reasonable and consistent as possible. The Fi dom loves logic out of a conscious decision, which is based on their personal preference, beliefs, and/or interests. If they have decided that something else has attracted their attention and now they love it, they may downplay the importance of logic and turn to another preference. See? The Fi dom makes decisions based on personal beliefs, personal preferences, and what they believe to be the best and the most right for themselves.

Another example, both a Ti dom and an Fi dom decide to study astrophysics - a typical 'NT' field of study. The Ti dom might be most interested in discovering the principles and patterns in the universe, and their focus is upon the universe as the target of their academic interest, because they are driven by the mysteries and discoveries related to the cosmos, not anything from themselves.

The Fi dom, on the other hand, makes a similar decision for a more personal reason - because they feel they could be empowered by the expertise in astrophysics, because they love the cosmos, because their parents are astronomers and they feel a personal connection with the subject, etc. In Fi, you can always find a more personal and more feelings-driven reason.

In a word, a Ti dom does something because it is the most reasonable/logical decision for them; whereas an Fi dom might do the same thing, because it is the decision most aligned with their feelings, personal preferences, and what they see as best for themselves. Put differently, because they want it, they love it.

You might want to consider other possibilities - you may be led by a perceiving function; you may be an E, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
I don't see any issues. Falling in love with CS/anything doesn't make you Ti/T/anything. It tells me how you feel about those things if anything, which is a Feeling process.
You mean that as a 'thinking type,' I am not even allowed to 'like' things - even computer code? I would guess this applies to such things as liking music as well... Sorry, but that notion to me couldn't be anymore lame...

Well, you might be not as intuitive as you think, this is an option too.
Bull. What about fields like computer animation or graphic design? Tell me that those people don't have a big imagination even though they apply it to a sensory domain...
 

·
Registered
ENTJ 8w7
Joined
·
2,293 Posts
You mean that as a 'thinking type,' I am not even allowed to 'like' things - even computer code? I would guess this applies to such things as liking music as well... Sorry, but that notion to me couldn't be anymore lame...
No, that's not what I meant. My point was that your information doesn't prove anything. You can "love" CS with any kind of personality. Last sentence by "if anything" implies that any kind of association with any function would be a stretch here.

Now, look at your response. You seem to be offended/defensive for no clear reason while ignoring the argument itself. This might be a useful clue in itself.

Bull. What about fields like computer animation or graphic design? Tell me that those people don't have a big imagination even though they apply it to a sensory domain...
And what made you think that I have any assumptions about the extents of their imaginations?
A mere hypothesis that you might be not intuitive, added for the sake of completeness, was enough to get you a bit fired up, isn't that curious? It could allow us to draw a few more interesting although, perhaps, rather unflattering implications, which also might be helpful.
 

·
Registered
ISTP
Joined
·
675 Posts
I also graduated with honors in computer science. I credit the professor in an introduction to CS course I took for suggesting I go that direction instead of floundering in the chemistry degree I thought I wanted. I played around with computers from a young age, but with my lower intuition, just couldn't put two and two together back then. Made what I thought was the best decision regardless of passion. And that's what I see in your post - passion.
 

·
Registered
ISTP, 6w5 sx/so, 631 Tritype
Joined
·
3,257 Posts
Bull. What about fields like computer animation or graphic design? Tell me that those people don't have a big imagination even though they apply it to a sensory domain...
Imagination is not type specific, just literaly ignore all of the useless 16personalities definitions of the types, they are extremely stereotypical and explain things in a plain surface level without digging deeper.

Every type can have imagination, it really manifests depending on your cognitive function stack preference, even Si doms can have imagination, but it works differently to those who are N dom, more on an conscious level rather than unconscious in S dom/auxes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lww23 and DOGSOUP

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,914 Posts
Imagination is not type specific, just literaly ignore all of the useless 16personalities definitions of the types, they are extremely stereotypical and explain things in a plain surface level without digging deeper.

Every type can have imagination, it really manifests depending on your cognitive function stack preference, even Si doms can have imagination, but it works differently to those who are N dom, more on an conscious level rather than unconscious in S dom/auxes.
I would actually like to see one of those N doms explain the difference lol
 

·
Registered
Dreamer, sometimes awake. Creative Ti.
Joined
·
157 Posts
Imagination is not type specific, just literaly ignore all of the useless 16personalities definitions of the types, they are extremely stereotypical and explain things in a plain surface level without digging deeper.

Every type can have imagination, it really manifests depending on your cognitive function stack preference, even Si doms can have imagination, but it works differently to those who are N dom, more on an conscious level rather than unconscious in S dom/auxes.
I would actually like to see one of those N doms explain the difference lol
Agree. Any type can have a rich and wild imagination and it is not an N-specific thing. It is the stereotypical view that imagination, memory, dreams, etc. are attributable to some single specific function. Wrong. None of those is function or type specific. Imagination is not N, memory is not Si, and dreams are not N.

I'm not a perceiving dom, but I'll try to explain the major difference between N imagination and S imagination based on my own understanding and the things I've read.

Se imagination - has a typical focus on the external object. Revolves around the object and imagine what could happen if one interacts with that object, what it is like, how it feels, what kind of experience one might have, etc. It tends to be centered on the external object. Speculative. Investigative. Triggered by the external, the sensory.

Si imagination - has a typical focus on inner sensory impressions. Might imagine how it is like to repeat the pleasant sensory experience, can be reality-alienating if one is not satisfied with the present surroundings, and might think how things can be changed to invoke more positive sensations. Si imagination can be very different from the real world, nevertheless, it is about tangible objects and sensations, and can be very specific. Triggered by the internal, the sensory.

Ni imagination - Ni doms do not have hallucinations but there might be flashes of unexplainable inner images every now and then, and those may or may not be triggered by any Se contact with external reality. Those images tend to be highly abstract and the meanings often are not immediately clear. There is a high degree of symbolism and even the Ni dom self has to contemplate the meanings. Ni imagination is closely tied to the subconscious, and the Ni dom can freely access the subconscious world. Those are not the same as the S-types' conscious imagination, because the images and revelations come up suddenly, without an intentional or conscious effort made to imagine anything. Sometimes you get an Ni image, and it can be the summary of something, e.g., your state of mind, other's personality, a specific situation you are in, etc. It tends to be a generalization with certain meanings and the meanings do not lie in the specifics of the images but rather, are rooted in the image when taken as a whole. Consider it like abstract art. There are meanings in it, and you are the one to unlock the meanings.

If you are an Ni-aux, you might have those images and revelations from time to time, just less frequent.
If you are an Ni dom, your life centers around those inner images, and like it or not, they will constantly pop up in your mind and if you try to explain them to others, you will likely be seen as mad.

Ne imagination - possibilities coming from current reality, e.g, how things can be made better, what-if scenarios, what might happen in the future. Tends to be rooted in reality and can be realized in an external environment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
Ni imagination is closely tied to the subconscious, and the Ni dom can freely access the subconscious world. Those are not the same as the S-types' conscious imagination, because the images and revelations come up suddenly, without an intentional or conscious effort made to imagine anything.
While I agree it is more or less so, here's a good moment to point out that it's not all that good and desirable at all to have such tricks in our mind. Which may be the reason why Ni domness is that rare.

Typology focuses on it mostly like it's some all-positive superpower. But given the description above, that it all can happen suddenly without external tangible stimuli, what guarantees that it produces only desired positive and useful effects not something dreadful, nightmarish or even delusional? This aspect smoothly gets "forgotten".

If there's no link between this and conciousness, user can't choose either, what's the outcome. Looked from that angle, it's not practical to have such features in our mind and the latter might be reason why they're not widespread with evolution.

In other words, chance of some some acid flasback like scenarios too? :)

Also, couldn't other people take malicious advantage of that feature and make Ni dom see what they don't want to see?

Maybe movie named "Inception" is closer to truth than I thought - NTJ friend once said that if you want them to effectively bend according to your idea, make them think it's their idea. Starts to feel a bit scary to think maybe I've already done that at some points...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 · (Edited)
I have more to add: I read a study that said that if people with ADHD are intelligent ('high IQ'), then they may falsely test negative for having executive dysfunction. I'm sure everyone here knows what ADHD is (and IQ), but executive function revolves around one's ability to plan, problem solve, and shift attention. Executive dysfunction therefore means that one is lacking some of these skills. Accordingly, people with ADHD should fit this criteria. Therefore, many of those with ADHD who have high intelligence incorrectly believe that their executive skills are fine, because their intelligence masks the problem. I had for years assumed that I have ADHD but that my executive skills are fine. I would get high scores on such tests - even though I have problems functioning in (e.g.) an office environment. When I read that study, a light bulb went off: my 'high IQ' might be masking the true difficulties that I have with executive functioning. Likewise, I don't stumble over many of the cognitive traps and snares that feeling types are susceptible to - one reason why I've always questioned the dichotomy. However, because of that study, another light bulb went off: my intelligence is probably masking these issues as well, which is the exact reason why I don't identify with many people who are feeling types - even though I am probably a genuinely 'feeler.'

Another point not related to the above: if the thinking function has any connection with intelligence, then most thinking types should be interested in ideas that sound intelligent - regardless of whether the person is a thinking type or not. In other words, in using one's thinking function, it should be more important that the other side has something logical to say, as opposed to agreeing simply because they are 'negative' or 'unemotional' (or disagreeing because they are not). A thinking type who doesn't value logic and intelligence is at heart just some crotchety 'blowhard' or 'crank' (or maybe just some cartoon villain) and it is foolish to assume that such a person has anything intelligent to say simply because they don't like emotions...

In other words, so long as someone has something constructive to offer, then their ideas should be heard - regardless of whether they are thinkers or feelers (or any other function). It is therefore only when someone's ideas are not practical or are purely negative that the insights are hogwash...
 

·
Host
Joined
·
23,875 Posts
Ti: years ago, I fell in love with computer science. I still love data structures, compiler design, and assembly code; I graduated near the top of my class. I also lived and breathed computer code for several years.

Fi: there is no place on the planet that fits my values like the University of Notre Dame; the university's interest in academics and sports (especially football) fits me to a 'tee.' Add in the notion of religion and God and you have almost everything I value. Even my interest in the 1970s fits; that decade was a golden era for Notre Dame football. The one thing that is different is that I love the humorous side of things. If Notre Dame had the humorous side, it would have everything I value- with Boston College and Georgetown not far behind...

Anyway, you can see my issues with the MBTI; assume I am like Notre Dame in personality type; if I am 'Fi,' what about my strong backbone in academics? If I am 'Ti,' what about the ethical/religious side? And, if I am intuitive, what about the deep interest in sports - and therefore the sensory side of things? (E.g., "Touchdown Jesus.")

Now, I can imagine some people saying that money is what drives that place but I'm not sure that they are any different in that sense than Harvard or MIT, which people don't necessarily view the same way...

Anyway, your opinions please...
You really don't. Just because we have the functions of our core types does not preclude us from using others. Our core type functions are our preferred functions. They were the ones that we latched onto when we were young and trying to learn as much about our environment as possible. They were the ones that worked best for us, therefore, we favor them. There's nothing in the book that says you can't use others, it's just that you have gotten consistently good results from using the prefered functions, so you tend to stick with them more than others. Some situations call for changing things up and many of us are able to do that without too much trouble. Others, not so much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: paradox_conqueror

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
You really don't. Just because we have the functions of our core types does not preclude us from using others. Our core type functions are our preferred functions. They were the ones that we latched onto when we were young and trying to learn as much about our environment as possible. They were the ones that worked best for us, therefore, we favor them. There's nothing in the book that says you can't use others, it's just that you have gotten consistently good results from using the prefered functions, so you tend to stick with them more than others. Some situations call for changing things up and many of us are able to do that without too much trouble. Others, not so much.
Interesting food for thought there. Using your analysis, my strongest function would be intuition. There are so many things that I just 'know' that it surprises me when other people don't immediately get it 'right' - or get it at all. Then I have to explain my reasoning and I stumble over the words in trying to explain it (e.g., thinking'). My people skills are not absolutely flawless either. Therefore, I lean more towards leading intuition based on the above analysis.
 

·
Host
Joined
·
23,875 Posts
Interesting food for thought there. Using your analysis, my strongest function would be intuition. There are so many things that I just 'know' that it surprises me when other people don't immediately get it 'right' - or get it at all. Then I have to explain my reasoning and I stumble over the words in trying to explain it (e.g., thinking'). My people skills are not absolutely flawless either. Therefore, I lean more towards leading intuition based on the above analysis.
Functions don't work in isolation either. They generally work as a team, especially your dominant and auxiliary functions. I'd be a complete mess if it weren't for my Ti backing up my Ne, for example. My Ne comes up with all sorts of ideas, patterns, connections, and possibilities, but without my Ti, I would never have the necessary framework to understand, nor communicate my findings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 · (Edited)
I have even more to add: while I think the descriptions of Extraverted Intuition (and especially those of ENTPs) are quite good, I have a problem with the introverted types. For instance, INTJs are supposed to have dominant intuition, but when you read the INTJ descriptions, they seem cold, calculated and 'not liking small talk and social situations.' And yet they are filled with 'rationality' and 'logical conviction.' This seems closer to the MBTI thinking/feeling dimension. Therefore, it seems that INTJs are more likely leading thinking types instead of leading intuitives. The same thing again with INTPs: they are filled with 'big insights' and 'prefer theories over practical affairs,' and yet they are 'spacey,' 'absent-,minded' and 'torn-off from reality.' Again, more likely leading intuitives than thinkers.

I therefore think that the theory conflates 'thinking' with rationality and 'intuition' with thinking. Therefore, as an INFP, all of these theoretical insights I have seem like they are 'Ti,' because Ti is conflated with process of thinking in many type descriptions; I am often doing some heavy-duty 'thinking,' but this is more like the tasks described as 'intuition' in the MBTI dichotomies. Therefore, MBTI 'thinkers' are more in line with what is rational and this therefore has nothing to do with 'contemplation' or 'insightfulness,' which the theory conflates with (e.g.) the INTP's leading function - which is actually intuition, not thinking. (And, of course, there are exceptions to all of this, but I am not going to get into it...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 · (Edited)
A note on the sensing/intuition dichotomy: in Holland's Code you have the notion of 'artistic' and 'realistic.' Both can exist in a sensory domain, but artistic types are closer to intuitives, because of their creativity and imagination. Sensing types therefore fit into the realistic category, because they enjoy down-to-earth activities such as cooking, cleaning, farm work, the outdoors, etc. As an artistic type, I can get into things like architecture and even sports - but it is more the artistry or beauty of these things that appeals to me. Someone with the mind of (e.g.) an engineer is closer to a a realistic type, which is closer to sensing in the MBTI and they therefore see these activities differently...

Just some more food for thought about the MBTI dichotomies...
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top