I or N or T or P

[floyd]

which trait is strongest in you? are you an intP, inTp, iNtp, or Intp?

[Phenylethylene]

I can't decide... does that imply P?

[jyakulis]

god double post sorry

[jyakulis]

I don't know what this means. We are all INTP's shouldn't are strongest letter technically be intuition or thinking? Do you mean like what do we test the highest at. That seems sort of irrelevant.

[In...TP]

obviously Ti...

[aether]

I cannot stop thinking....how do I stop this madness!!

[kafkaesque]

I scored very high I.
I am more extraverted on this forum than I am anywhere else.

[floyd]

jungian functions are a theory, a bad theory in my opinion. i think an intp can be dominant in I, N, T, or P. intPs, inTps, iNtps, and Intps will have different personalities.

[jyakulis]

You can't be a dominant P that's not even a function. P just help determine your cognitive processes.

INTP: Ti, Ne, Si, Fe

there is no P or I....just T N S F and whether you extravert or introvert them. And if anything the "P'ness" is most likely attributed to underdeveloped cognitive processes that help with organization. I don't know maybe Te and Se. I'm not sure. Or maybe that Ti and N are strong and there is much more detatchment from your external enviornment.

[Shai Gar]

T

[floyd]

i/e n/s f/t j/p = traits

are jungian function disciples the fundementalist right wing of the type world? there is no empirical evidence supporting jungian functions so why does anyone a. believe them b. regurgitate them as fact.

[jyakulis]

i/e n/s f/t j/p = traits

are jungian function disciples the fundementalist right wing of the type world? there is no empirical evidence supporting jungian functions so why does anyone a. believe them b. regurgitate them as fact.


not right wing, more like fascist

[jyakulis]

If you believe jungian theory to be flawed then why collect data on it. Are you trying to break INTP further down into 4 more subtypes?

[Lee]

jungian functions are a theory, a bad theory in my opinion. i think an intp can be dominant in I, N, T, or P. intPs, inTps, iNtps, and Intps will have different personalities.
I agree with floyd, the whole Ti, Ne, Si etc. it's a load of questionable crap, sorry for the language but... well, it is.

Floyd's use of typology is just as applicable and relevent, if not more so than the Jungian functions.

[jyakulis]

I agree with floyd, the whole Ti, Ne, Si etc. it's a load of questionable crap, sorry for the language but... well, it is.



Ohh yeah why?

[Lee]

Ohh yeah why?
Located in different regions of brain

[Pedro_The_Lion]

There is no empirical evidence supporting ideas such as the unconscious or the id either nor for most any of the fundamental concepts behind any theories that man has created. That does not imply falsehood to those concepts however. Empirical evidence does not imply truth to data either.

[Lee]

There is no empirical evidence supporting ideas such as the unconscious or the id either nor for most any of the fundamental concepts behind any theories that man has created. That does not imply falsehood to those concepts however. Empirical evidence does not imply truth to data either.
No, your right... you could say the id is roughly equivilent to the limbic system and the frontal lobes are the ego, but then Freudian theories are nothing special either.

I still think the Jungian functions are a poor theory, the jist is quite good, but it hardly get's it right, a close enough approximation perhaps.

It needs improving.

[jyakulis]

Well I agree that the human thought process is very complicated as well. I wasn't trying to be an asshole and disregard your idea. Though I still don't know what it is.

[Lee]

My idea is that the Jungian functions model is flawed, I cannot see any reason as to why floyd's use of typolgy should be regarded any lesser, if anything it actually makes more sense... you might be able to tell I am no great fan of Jung, I especially don't understand why people cling to his original thoeries, I expect if he came back today he would say "what are you doing, these were only initial ideas, why haven't you improved anything, did you expect me to get it right on the first go!"

[jyakulis]

Heh by idea I meant floyd's. And I'm not disregarding it.......still here....just want to see where he's going with it.

[Lee]

Anyway, I am going with percieving... I do not make decisions...ever, I could quite happily argue agaisnt everything I just said and end up not knowing where I stand.

[Pedro_The_Lion]

I understand what you are trying to do but from what I understand there is brain correlation between the specific functions (Ne, Ti, ...) not just the characteristics. Also, could you put a definition (just an attempt nothing fancy) for P/J since you believe it to not be described in the traditional dominant function way (Jung/socionics) or the extraverted function way (Myers-Briggs)?


Anyway, I am going with percieving... I do not make decisions...ever, I could quite happily argue agaisnt everything I just said and end up not knowing where I stand.

That sounds more like an Se as dual seeking thing combined with a P thing to me but then again I'm coming from a socionics perspective. Anyway, that is characteristic of INxPs not Ps as a whole.

[floyd]

the kiersey and mbti tests (and most analogues) are composed of 4 traits not the "jungian functions", if functions are the heart of this system why is that?

/I understand what you are trying to do but from what I understand there is brain correlation between the specific functions (Ne, Ti, ...) not just the characteristics./

i would like to see those studies, i think this is just another theory not a finding.

J = left brained, P = right brained.

[coffeezombie]

This question is not about functional preference. It's just a simple, mentally subjective "strength measure." One can still be the strongest in P compared to any of the functions. I don't see why this is not possible.

[snarled]

I'm a P.i.N.t.

[waxwing]

To answer your original question, I would be iNtp, although the P is also over 90%.

[Pedro_The_Lion]

This question is not about functional preference. It's just a simple, mentally subjective "strength measure." One can still be the strongest in P compared to any of the functions. I don't see why this is not possible.

I'm not disagreeing that P is a measure I just think it's more precise than that (ie Ni, Si, Ne, Se).


the kiersey and mbti tests (and most analogues) are composed of 4 traits not the "jungian functions", if functions are the heart of this system why is that?

Indeed which is why I don't support tests (for the most part) and am thinking of formulating my own. I will think of getting the data for you I just feel lazy right now so have patientce with me.

Lastly, especially on MBTI tests I think J is confused with strong S as opposed to strong the characteristics they are supposed to be using to determine J. I test as a P sometimes because I am "unsure" of myself (ie I don't like exerting influence [an Se thing not a J thing]).

[jyakulis]

Basically what i was saying is well what does one hope to accomplish by complicating a system that already doesn't completely work. I mean the tests aren't completely accurate as is. Adding another dimension just overcomplicates the issue at hand. I'm not even completely sold on INTP to go on picking one of the 4 "traits" as my preference. It turns into 16 types with 4 extra subdivisions: 64 total. It would be like adding more theory onto another theory that you see no empirical evidence for in the first place. THIS happens a lot and is completely possible. Those personality pages and fun little type descriptions are founded from the functions. If there is no emprical evidence for the functions then why even use the theory in the first place to provide for extra classifications. AGAIN I don't know where you are going with this just what I thought. Anyway on tests I score the highest in thinking and that's what I voted.

[floyd]

it's certainly possible to be an INTp or an iNTp or even an intp (as well as inxP, etc.)... but i wanted to keep things simple on this poll. personality systems are all stereotype systems. the mbti or any other personality system is not the blueprint of personality, it is low res sketch from the author's point of view.

there is empirical evidence for E/I, and J/P... T/F and N/S are close enough to Agreeablness and Openmindedness in the Big 5 system to have validity as well. the mbti is less empirically accurate to the stucture of personality compared to the big 5, but there are enough similarities that the mbti is still useful.

as far as complication, accuracy is the important issue. anyway, jungian functions are a mess of complexity... it can only be looked as not complicated if you take things literally and don't want to relearn something else which is more accurate. if you try to map jungian functions to the personality research record you will find that the mbti as four traits is a far better fit... which is likely why almost all mbti tests intentionally or unintentionally are structured around four traits, not the jungian functions. as far as why the mbti can be useful even when disregarding the functions is because people can produce more accurate and less accurate ideas (very common).

[Vagabond]

I usually score equally in I and N, so I took the test again, especially for you. :p

I: 89
N: 88
T: 88
P: 22

So let's say I.

[Serotonin]

I'm a P.i.N.t.

So am I. :cheers:

*Has a p.i.n.t. with snarled*

[nihilist]

Anyway, I am going with percieving... I do not make decisions...ever, I could quite happily argue agaisnt everything I just said and end up not knowing where I stand.

I guess when the perceiving factor is extreme, one is preoccupied in a chronic battle with the mind to decide if he is right or wrong. Hence, decisions are hardly made.

[Miss Anthropic]

You can't be a dominant P that's not even a function. P just help determine your cognitive processes.

INTP: Ti, Ne, Si, Fe

there is no P or I....just T N S F and whether you extravert or introvert them. And if anything the "P'ness" is most likely attributed to underdeveloped cognitive processes that help with organization. I don't know maybe Te and Se. I'm not sure. Or maybe that Ti and N are strong and there is much more detatchment from your external enviornment.

I think you are dissecting the meaning of the traits too much for what the basic question was...(I know, that's what we live for.) But the Introversion vs. Extraversion is a manner in which we garner energy....does it come from within? Do you need to get it from socializing with other people? So of course everything else is expressed through that.
If you take the poll for exactly what is asked, whether or not you think its relevant, it appears to mean: In which aspect did you score the highest?

[snarled]

Personally, I divide intp's into two distinct groups.

1. Those who 'know everything' but don't know why.

2. Those who 'can't know anything' and will tell you why.



And a pint does seem to be the best known form of medicine for a P.i.N.t.
:cheers:

[booyalab]

I think this should be fairly easy. The E/I dichotemy applies to almost every situation, whereas N, T, and P dont. Therefore, my "I" is stronger.
This leads me to how bad the question is, if the relevance of the traits isn't equally distributed throughout every situation I'm in, it's kind of pointless to compare the frequency or intensity in which I use each of them..right? (I mean, and to look for a reason behind the strengths of the traits beyond which is relevant most often)

[snarled]

Hmmm...

*marks booya down as type #2*

[booyalab]

how about #3 -->I know everything and I know why, but since no one else knows anything or why, they think I know nothing.

[floyd]

Intp = the recluse
iNtp = the intellectual
inTp = the crank/jerk
intP = the derelict

i agree, i would put booyalab down as #3. she thinks she is right as a matter of egotism not intellect.

[EmmaPeel]

introversion

[attila_the_hunny]

We have a floyd lover on our hands.

[Dr. Haight]

Not if she knew him.


And... Intuition.

[Conan]

I always liked floyd.

[Kljoki]

We have a floyd lover on our hands.
Make that two.


I support floyd's stance

if you try to map jungian functions to the personality research record you will find that the mbti as four traits is a far better fit... which is likely why almost all mbti tests intentionally or unintentionally are structured around four traits, not the jungian functions.
and agree with it totally.


I also identify with Lee's stance

My idea is that the Jungian functions model is flawed, I cannot see any reason as to why floyd's use of typolgy should be regarded any lesser, if anything it actually makes more sense... you might be able to tell I am no great fan of Jung, I especially don't understand why people cling to his original thoeries, I expect if he came back today he would say "what are you doing, these were only initial ideas, why haven't you improved anything, did you expect me to get it right on the first go!"
and agree with it totally.

Oh, and thinking.

[mgb]

Now, talk about MBTI.

[phenol]

P with N close behind or equal to P

[squints]

INtuition. I'll have to think some more about the problems with the function theory. And I definitely don't think that there's a set formula for each personality type.

[attila_the_hunny]

T is way up there, but I is a close second.

[attila_the_hunny]

Make that two.


I support floyd's stance

and agree with it totally.


I also identify with Lee's stance

and agree with it totally.

Oh, and thinking.

You can agree with someone and not like them.

[Kljoki]

You can agree with someone and not like them. True.

Actually, I was referring to the way he thinks. I have no knowledge of him as a person so I wouldn't know if I'd like him *in general*.