Passive verses active functions.

[meshou]

I have had an Idear.

I have wondered before if I am an N because I'm good at connecting things, or if I am one because I am so profoundly unobservant that I merely test Not S. I wonder if I am not a passive N, if you would.

Likewise, not a P because they are more interested in process, but a P because they don't have the capacity to organize their lives. An S not becase they actively observe the world around them, but because they could not free associate non-concrete ideas with a gun to their head. T because they actually feel close to nothing and have no interpersonal skills, F because they can't be objective and rational etc.

So, it would be interesting to make up a test on OKcupid or something to experiment with this. I wonder if the "passive" is about where most people start, and finding how passive they were would pinpoint about where someone was in developing their functions.

Or at least it'd be fun.

Anyone have any ideas how to ask the questions? What'd make a passive use of a function verses an active one? How to make it applicable to all types who'd take it (as in, it'd have to measure both type AND development-- not an easy thing to devise, I'd think)? Tell me it's BS? Just wanna discuss? Whee!

[abathur]

I'd say you could test for it almost as it's done now. Perhaps you'd expand the question set with more of each type, but instead of counting the "not me" answer to a question that is (essentially) asking "are you a sensor?" as a point towards intuitive you'd just count it as a "not a sensor" point. That is to say, instead of a question measuring a point on the e/i, n/s, f/t, j/p spectrum, a question would only measure one half of each spectrum at a time.

It also seems like this method of testing would allow for more accurate results all around. That is, instead of asking someone 1-5 (not me through exactly me) "I like to spend time alone" would indicate a level of resistance to introversion on a 5 point scale instead of a place in a spectrum on a 5 point scale.

Mostly a math/calculation change, then perhaps adding questions to compensate for the reduced scope of each.

[waxwing]

Interesting idea. It sort of begs the question: Does the absence of certain capabilites in a person make him capable of something else by default? Let's say there are two kinds of elephants: gray and yellow (representing N and S, for example). The elephants are grouped in the following ways: One group with only gray elephants, one with only yellow elephants, one with a few gray elephants and a few yellow elephants, and one with no elephants at all.

I think you would have to test this by using a four-option model, but I can't think of specific non-elephant examples.

[abathur]

I think that's more in the interpretation of results than in the testing. For instance, if you tested for N, S, T, F etc each with separate questions you'd still be establishing who is in each of the 4 groups without much trouble, you just wouldn't have a pre-defined source to draw on for exactly how someone who answered against both N and S would be motivated and interact with the world.

[melancholeric]

I've been thinking about that too, particularly J/P. Because I think I'm not a P because of my Ne (or Se) but my complete lack of Te & Fe.

That in turn would mean that I'm heavily introverted because I dont' seem to be using extroverted functions that much. Which is what the J/P scale is supposed to indicate anyway.

But if I have any Si (or Ni), and I do, probably more than the average INTP, doesn't that make me even slightly SJ'ish? And I might be. I don't understand the J/P thing completely.

Cognitiveprocesses test touches on this somewhat. Also I think mgbradsh talked about a new kind of test which would have tested this, somewhat.

I'm not making any sense. I need sleep.

[abathur]

I need sleep. Don't we all?
It seems having a function developed at any level indicates some amount of use. I remember reading some stuff about becoming self aware enough to consciously use functions, but I don't really know when/how a developed but non-primary function will be getting used, though. Someone said they've updated/changed the cognitive process test, but in the old one I took I had a really high Ti/Ne but not too far behind that Ni and Fi.

(I guess I'm saying it'd be nice to have more info on what having different processes in different orders and developed to different extents really *means*. I saved a screen of my results, but other than pretty colors, and noting differences between myself and others in the CP results thread, it didn't mean a ton.) http://webpages.acs.ttu.edu/treveret/intp.gif

/me shrugs