The False Apperance of I/E, and P/J

SP types are closer to the N scale, I know that much.

I would agree with most of the things up there. I don't think I would consider IxTJ types to be less introverted than IxFP types, though. The P scale is a little harder to determine too, I think...

Good idea

 

This is interesting, but I think this is way too specific. The person dictates this more than the type.

I think you can make some generalizations, but I just think this is too specific.

Still it is a very interesting concept to list them like this, I applaud the idea.

 

Wow, this helps a lot, considering I was only slightly expressed in the extroversion, and slightly expressed in the judging. I knew there had to be a reason the infj profile seemed to be the best fit.


Haha, your disclaimer is classic infj. I love it.

 

Yup, nice work..and you are right about the type confusion...Since there's always exceptions between each type( for example my Introversion is very polarized..I stills score as an INFJ though which brings my confusion...

 

Well, what I mean to say is I think this table is too inaccurate to be stated in this manner. ESFP most talkative? I really don't think so. Most P too? INTP most introverted, not in my experience.

While I agree with some of this, I just think on the whole it is way overgeneralized. MBTI is a far better generalization because it is more general, it doesn't box people in like this.

Sorry, don't mean to be blunt, but that is the only way I can state what I meant without sugar coating it to the point where you don't understand what I really mean.

In theory I love this idea, but once I see it, I really have to say I don't agree with it, or think it is possible to make a chart like this that is anywhere near accurate enough to be effective.

If you don't mind me asking, how did you come up with this?

 

I'm curious what is your P score. I think you have questioned almost everyones creditability so fair.lol

Not that is bad. but it strikes as very NPish.

 

Uh-Oh, I'm a really high introvert O.O

 

I am definitely high on P I think. I am sorry if I am questioning credibility, but when I see really black and white judgments, I have to come in and point out that generally things aren't that simple.

I mean, I have the right to say I think this scale is not accurate right? I am not lying, I am not making stuff up, I am just pointing it out.


I read a funny signature one time, can't remember who, I am not trying to steal it, but it said something to the equating simplicity to bigfoot in the effect of:

Simplicity and Bigfoot occur in about the same frequency in life.



Oh, and I think you may be displaying a bit of the "human negativity bias" in remembering only the bad events, there are plenty of times I agreed with people, but those can get ignored in favor of...more stimulating responses.

 

Here are my revisions, but this is a great idea. Good spot, Indigo~! I think it is debatable that STPs are more J like than NTPs as they don't have their Ne getting in the way.

 

ISTP lowest on P? I am sorry, I don't mean to always come here and criticize but no way. I have tons of ISTP friends and their P is very high.

Remember, IPs/EJs share a kind of quick judgment but this isn't J. Also, IJs/EPs share a more information gathering style, but this isn't P necessarily.


What are we defining as P and J here btw?

Spontaneous vs. Planning right?

Or are you defining it as how extroverted their perception function is relative to their judgment function?

 

Oh, I don't know about that. From my experience, STJ types are worse than NTJ types

 

The problem that i have with your rebuttal of black and white answers is you are pushing relativism and to the extreme I would say. What ever that makes you feel this need. Shows me don't you don't want to commit to answer which is very P of you.

I'm not saying this theory is right or wrong. But I think your need that just because we can't find the exact answer or you don't like pin it down to an exact, doesn't make it correct. There are still black and white answers.

Also just a heads up some of us (me as well) don't take Socionics as a series MBIT reference just want to make that clear. As it fundamental changes the structure and order of personality types.

If your going to question creditability you need to be able to back it up and saying something extremely relative isn't the way to do so.

 

Whoa there, since when is a strong J bad?

 

I didn't mean worse as in more terrible a trait, but worse as in more expressed I admire strong J a lot of the time; they're a lot more capable when it comes to getting things done.

 

I would argue a strong J or P is very bad. In that they are very hard to live with. There to fair out on the scale to easily mesh with.

 

I am making a judgment, I am saying that this is too general to be useful, that is a judgment. That is pretty black and white. I am not revising the system because I don't think it is going to be accurate. Some things we should pin down because it is better to do so, other things shouldn't be pinned down. In my opinion, this chart is an example of the latter (no offense to Indigo, it takes courage and intelligence to post one's opinions in this manner, I applaud that). I like MBTI, I like Socionics, they are useful generalizations, this one is not. MBTI purposely left the J/P thing vague because that way it applies to more people. If they wanted to, they could have done exactly what Indigo did, but they didn't.

Discrediting my argument because I am a P is exactly the kind of logic I am trying to prevent.

Socionics and MBTI are based on Jungian ideas. So they are both like cousins or siblings. I am not saying Socionics is based on MBTI, both are based on Jung, and that makes it relevant.