PDA

View Full Version : Tracking the Elusive Human: Psychological Types



christinel
20 Dec 2005, 04:12 AM
I wonder what everyone thinks about the psychological type descriptions on this page:

http://www.innerexplorations.com/catpsy/t1c1.htm

You have to scroll down almost halfway before you can actually read about the individual types. I don't think the author of this site is a Jungian psychologist, but the type descriptions here seem quite similar to Jung's, except much more simplified and easier to understand. When people have trouble understanding what Jung says about the psychological types, I sometimes direct them to this page.

Depending on how you read them, you may find that these descriptions are similar to Myers-Briggs or even Keirseyan type descriptions. Personally, I find them to be quite different, especially from Keirsey's. Like Jung's, these descriptions are purely about psychological *functions*. For instance, "feeling" is the process that evaluates whether something is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, etc. So a "feeling type" here is simply a person who most habitually uses the feeling function, and subjects the other functions under the "domination" of feeling. The description of the feeling type is not attached to ideas about archetypal/social roles or complexes like "identity-seeker", "counsellor", "helper", etc. I think psychological function is more "basic" than all of that. A person can be, say, an Intuitive-Feeling function type *without* being an "identity-seeker", though the process of identity-seeking may often make use of the intuitive and feeling functions -- among other things. At least, that's how I understand Jung's model, anyway.

What I am especially wondering is -- which type description on this page most describes you, and which least describes you? And do the functions that *most* and *least* describe you match the functions that are dominant and least dominant according to your Myers-Briggs (and Keirseyan) four letter type code? Do people who have the Myers-Briggs/Keirsey INTP type code see themselves most in the Introverted Thinking type and least in the Extraverted Feeling type?

dziner
21 Dec 2005, 05:44 AM
I identify the most with the description of Introverted Intuition Type and least with Extroverted Sensation Type. That actually makes me INTJ !

Well, this is in conflict with all of my previous results as I always came out as INTP in the MBTI tests. Here, I had hard time figuring out whether my dominant function is Ti or Ni. The Ti type doesn't seem to be described in detail.

Is there any site which describes these cognitive processes in detail?

nathanm
21 Dec 2005, 04:41 PM
Those aren't "types" per se, but the 8 combinations of the 4 functions used in the 2 modes (E/I) of Jungian typology. They directly relate to the MBTI types, as there are 2 types that have each of the combinations as their dominant function. See this page (http://www.socionics.com/advan/mbti.htm) to clear up some of the confusion.

INTrPosr
23 Dec 2005, 11:01 AM
I had read those descriptions some time ago, but they were good to go over again. I actually liked the simplistic inquiries to determine your functions. Based on them I would be ENT.

Garyincinci
23 Dec 2005, 11:43 AM
I related to the Introverted Intuitive so closely that it almost made me cry. I've not yet seen such an accurate description of myself. Thanks!

Winterpark
23 Dec 2005, 04:19 PM
When I first read the Introverted Sensation Type on this page about a month ago it brought me to tears. I can also relate to Introverted Intuition to a great extent. The one that describes me the least is probably the Extraverted Feeling type but I'm not sure. So, Si and ISTP.

INTrPosr
25 Dec 2005, 03:07 PM
Winterpark, are you basing your conclusions on the Socionics theory?

Winterpark
26 Dec 2005, 05:26 AM
Winterpark, are you basing your conclusions on the Socionics theory?

Well I guess I am still an ISTP(TiSe) in MBTI. One of the reasons for the function conflict I think are the different function descriptions in MBTI and Socionics. MBTI-Ti is different from Socioncs-Ti and so are the other functions. Now the descriptions in the link above are supposed to be close to the original Jungian descriptions and they are also closer to Socionics. In that case I guess MBTI 's got slightly modified descriptions. I think that the way that Ti+Se operate in MBTI-ISTP is similar to the way Si+Te operate in Socioncs-ISTp and less similar to Ti+Se in Socionics-ISTj, And that goes for all introverted types. I still have not enough knowledge to conclude anything (nor will I ever have :) ) but I 'm sure I 'm not an ISTJ, if that's what you had in mind ;).