This is a continuation off of an earlier post, but one thing I find annoying about mbti type tests is that in distinguishing between T and F the options are sometimes so extreme that both seem ridiculous (this might happen for the other letters as well, but I feel it especially here).
Do you think reason is important or do you care more about where people come from? Do you care about being rational, just, and fair or do you care about making people feel good?
Erm... how about both? You can reason all you want but facts are meaningless without feelings. There is no inherentĀ ājusticeā orĀ āfairnessā in the world to base things off of, only that which we create. At the same time though, if you donāt listen to reason and think things through and deliberate, you wonāt understand the consequences of your actions. The people you can name are rarely the only ones who are going to be affected by a situation, and thus we develop overarching ideas of fairness and justice for a wider society and continue to try to improve them. Even if the only people affect were those directly involved, being too short sighted might only delay the grief and hurt feelings even if it avoids initial conflict. (Feelings and personal backgrounds are also facts of the situation and how it will unfold, even if they are less quantifiable, but these also should be put into a wider context)
I also get that these are positioned towards extremes so people can decide which one they lean towards even if they arenāt 100% one or the other, and I have typically identified as the end result (F because though reason is good, it is never sufficient to make a decision), but it does make me wonder whether its a flaw in the wording of the tests, a necessary evil to see which side people lean, or symptomatic of an assumption in mbti that I donāt agree with.
Iāve come to terms with by viewing my version of rationality as a product of my perceiving function trying to figure out how the world works before making the decision, but the questions still bug me. Iām curious about what other people think. Are there questions/wordings thereof that bug people because they only offer extremes? Do you see this as symptomatic of the test or the types?
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
ā Live Streamingā Interactive Chatā Private Showsā HD Qualityā Free Actions
Free to watch ā¢ No registration required ā¢ HD streaming
Learning about functions has helped me understand MBTI better (As a note Iām an INFP). This is because the various letters donāt work alone but rather as a part of a whole decision making process, and tests questions only are directed at one letter at a time (sometimes rather obviously even to those who havenāt spent much time with mbti), giving a false representation of what the various letters mean. That doesnāt necessarily mean that one can or should test directly for functions, just that the presentation of the tests can create misconception.
In particular, Iām remembering seeing questions that tried to split F from T and being annoyed because I believe both logic and feelings have a place in decision making. Presenting two options asāthe rational oneā andĀ āthe feelsy oneā didnāt make sense to me. Making a decision means choosing theĀ preferableĀ option. Whatās preferable is inherently subjective. At the same time, without any rationality, one could make a choice that turns out to be not preferable because you didnāt think through the facts of the situation and how it might play out. Thus, I always thought, not that my F was wonky, but that I was also simultaneously a T, just to a lesser extent. My interest in STEM and particularly math, which seems to line up with T, did not help my confusion either. (Note that this problem occurs with functions as well when I donāt look at them in the context of how they come together and what roles they play. I.e. for descriptions of Ti, I do enjoy thinking about how the world works or could work ect. but donāt use that how a dominant Ti would use it)
How functions help is that instead of just looking at each one on your own, it breaks down the decision making process, and shows how each of the letters fits into it.Ā
According to MBTI, there are two main stages of each decision: getting information and choosing. In turn each of these stages has internal and external components, as well as two main different styles of execution. The external portions of each seem more obvious (probably because they are directed outward and thus more noticeable). Ā
Thereās also the assumption that each decision should include a mix of information gathering and choosing, and also that there should be internal and external pieces. The second piece of the assumption can be interpreted as that one only has so much energy to expend outward and inward so it gets dived up.
Another assumption is needed to order these pieces of a decision. Here, a few (starting with two) of these pieces will dominate. Because these dominating functions need to work alone, they will be split between information gathering and choosing and between external and internal, and since things are rarely equal, one will be more prominent. The type is therefore determined by the first two functions (pieces of decision making) and their order. I am going to give examples, but I am not an expert of MBTI and had to look up online references anyways, so take with a grain of salt.
As more functions are added, they do so in an alternating fashion to balance out what is already there. So, the end one will get all the different styles, and for two styles of the same stage one will be internal and the other external. Because one is already fluent in the dominant style, it tends to rule that stage, and the other style in that stage will be the weakest.
The middle two letters (N v S and T v F) are the styles, while the other two letters (I v E and J v P) tell you the ordering and whether they are executed internally or externally. J v P is concerned with which stage is directed outward, and I v E says whether the internal or external portion dominates.
For the information gathering stage, the external portion is getting new information and the internal portion is reviewing whatās already known. The styles are getting information in trends and possibilities vs. information in facts and concrete sensations. These two styles correspond to N and S. Meanwhile, P will dictate that this stage is outward looking (spending external energy looking for more information rather than making decisions.) Ā Ex: remembering specific evnets is Si because of the specificity (S) and remembering (i). This differs from Ne which comes up with new information (e) and possibilities (N) for a current situation. These in turn contrast with somebody who decides to list the facts (S) of the current situation (e) and somebody who gets an impression of a situation (N) based of off past experiences (i).
For the Ā choosing stage, the difference between the internal and external portions is harder for me to describe other than whether one is judging an outcome by how it plays out in the world and the other is holding it to an internal standard. The two styles are choosing based onĀ āobjectiveā markers such as efficiency, consistency, organization, and how things work vs. choosing based onĀ āsubjectiveā markers such as feelings, values, and significance. (quotes because of the blurry line between objectivity and subjectivity.) Ex: Choosing based off of what fits an personal (i) set of values (F), in contrast with somebody who tries to organize (T) the situation (e). We also have people balancing otherās (e) emotions (F), and choosing an option because it fits consistently (T) with the personās model of the world (i).
Seeing the functions in this framework puts my previous qualms in perspective. Finding all the information and looking at how things can play out is a part of the whole process described, just not the part the test was trying to pick out. In fact, its highlighting my strong Perceiving aspect (my outward focus is directed at information, which in turn can look likeĀ ārationalityā and Thinking). Meanwhile, my decisions are ultimately based on my own internal emotions and values. I feel things very deeply, and spend a lot of time with those value systems. However, my introversion means that I am not as likely to share those emotions or make them obvious (unless your close), which makes their role in the decision making process less visible. (Along with the fact someone else pointed out that dominant functions are often taken for granted). So, I really am an F, and it does mesh with the rest of me.Ā
Mbti is more accurately measured by the person taking the test possibly with multiple tries if it's to someone feeling too agreeable as far as I can tell. Accurately perceiving someone is a skill you develop with practice. You have to know someone with that exact same type while making some contrasting bias for culture and gender. Like an intp mumbles and you can use that to differentiate one but you can't use expertise in hearthstone as a trait because Jenny from the block has no social interest in that.
