I love your ideas on the significance of the tertiary function; they've influenced my thinking on the types during my hiatus; I wish I had a better grasp on them when I made my own type videos. This is excellent work (as I've said before).
you didn't write this down did you? but really it's really cool that your knowledge of the cognitive functions helps you tackle the discussion of ENTPs and INTPs.
Related to the beginning of the video, I love the system and how specific Socionics is, but I dislike the definitions and flcus on action rather than its underlying themes and frameworks, such as Se being "power" focused.
The audience laughing is at 12:35. I ask the same question, what's funny about that? I also struggle to see the humour although it might very well be a relief laughter from some audience members which cathced on :D What was the fun element I ask?
Why are people so obsessed with whether or not it perfectly matches the criteria of 'scientific' or not, when the entirety of the field of psychology itself is not scientific? It's like they 'feel' threatened by the MBTI and tried science as a 'faith' - if it cannot be explained in external concrete terms = it isn't scientific = therefore it isn't real. However it certainly is real and the fact that it does work even though it cannot be explained by the limitations of science, gives it its validation.
that would eliminate all logical conclusions. if we go by only external concrete (immediately sensed) data then all of mathematics has to be discarded. It's abstract, all of it.
+John Barnes Not really big on rationalism either. Both empiricism and rationalism need integrating. You can't reject the outside world, nor can you reject man's ability to form abstractions.
+NumbMonkE You're not rejecting the outside world, you're rejecting your perception of the outside world which comes from your internal view which implies a subjective view. That's what you want to get rid of, so that you can create an objective view of the external world.
+PrincipalofPrinciples so you reject sense data? is that what you are saying? or are you saying that even if the sense data is correct we cannot have an objective perception of the world?
You mention that Ti-doms repress Fe because it is imprecise. But what exactly about Extroverted Feeling is imprecise? What about registering affects within a situation is imprecise?
I want to ask you about something important, which is when a person’s cognitive functions appear and are completed. I mean, at what age stage do they appear and complete?
I think it was this video that you said something along the lines of INTPs building systems whereas ISTPs don't as much. And that it had to do with tertiary Si. I don't know how much you've looked into functional charges, but do you think INTPs having -Ti and ISTPs having +Ti has more to do with that difference?
They are probably socionics terms. From my little understanding, each quadra will use the functions differently than the overlapping functions in another quadra. If you google "Plus/Minus Functions and Quadra Values by Victor Gulenko" on the16types you should be able to find it. I would just link it, but i think it'll be marked as spam
"They have it in the tertiary position." We adhere too strictly too often to a too (lol at this sentence) precise definition of the functions per type and reduce MBTI to a minimum quanta which is often too large as to obfuscate the truth.. perhaps out of our seemingly inherent tendency to categorise crudely as a temporary means of imperfect though usable understanding. Though with that said, I think a lot of these generalisations often hold quite true, and that the essence of the MBTI types hold quite firm.
The current model is being put under scrutiny and can be adapted as necessary according to the results of further examination. Are any of you of the opinion that an ENTP for example is capable of having a Ti function that overrides their Ne function or at least fights equally with it and can be argued to be not only the dominant function in the hierarchy but *also* the more developed function. Of course, if we go past the standard layman MBTI stuff most of us know a bit about, there are sub types for every type no? MBTI Step 2 right? I really know virtually nothing about it though. Perhaps it goes down an avenue that encourages a less rigid take on function hierarchy or perhaps it tries to categorise too precisely and ends up being as harmful as it is useful. What I do know is that nobody really talks about the second step in any of these videos. ISFP reporting in! Nah only kiddin'.
+TheOriginalGankstar I think the subtypes could be explained if ambivert was added to the mix. For one, INTPS aren't social and feel like outcasts ( My Dad is an INTP and he tells me this all the time) So an ENTP with high TI could be explained by ambiversion. For example, due to my highly devolved FI many would assume that I was an INFP despite being a total Extrovert. Although I do tend to flip flop between introvert and extrovert. Sometimes I can be so lost in my thoughts and ideas and stay alone for hours. Other times I can't survive without people. My se sucks and sometimes I'm barely conscious of the most obvious of objects or environmental changes. So technically, I would be ANFP based on that definition. Personally, I think if the full number of types was 24 that would make MBTI more expandable and much more explainable.
Excuse me , have you also taken down the ENTP video in which you had mentioned “ Wolfgang Pauli “ ?! Because I thought it would be interesting to have an opportunity to debate you about his type ?! IDRlabs mistyped him , he was rather an INTP , LII-Ti in Socionics terms .
There are several schools in socionics. It is not unified at all. Hidden agenda (name is poor) between two types are bit different and core motivation is not the same. I want to be very exited and enthusiastic about an idea and not being loved. I have had many Fi oops here and there while being excited about something. You really need Fi dominant people to point it to you to actually realize some of the flaws you are making with it. It is mind boggling actually. While everything goes smooth an INFP appears and starts to comment your style of interaction with others. Hard core analyzing is one of them. It is a flaw of creative function. Feeling followed by it might make it look a bit pathetic since you are not sharing the enthusiasm in a way recipients can relate to it. It is your own bubble with no explanations of the process. It is like: got it -> principle-> conclusions -> etc. That kind of style makes an INFP unease. Let's look at it from ESTJ perspective: you can not do that because... I can elaborate it further with them by adding more details but an INFP is completely lost. It is far worse when INFP observes your interaction with others. ISFPs: everything I do or say makes them uncomfortable (too much absurdity and logic) and their talk makes me do facepalms internally... **My school of socionics** :-)
I'm still on the fence here-I identify a lot with profiles of both, but have usually tested INTP. The HumanMetrics test put me at something like 60/40 I/E (slight preference), and I just took CelebrityTypes' ENTP or INTP test and got 53% ENTP 47% INTP. Also just noticed you posted this video on my birthday-funny coincidence.
+Frasier Linde It might simply mean that you are somewhere in the middle. I don't think these are completely binary things. But, as you seem to already be doing, find full descriptions of both and see which one you more identify with or, to put it in a different way, which are you more comfortable with. I'm INTP btw
Chino Mess He answers moral questions with to quote celebritytypes "logical certitude" as if it were the only possible answer, which is characteristic of repressed Fe. "Pathological" fear of indoctrinating/general lack of the didacticism of INTJs (the other type I've seen him listed as).
+Chino Mess Seems to be one who has come to very firm conclusions about many things. Once an INTP is convinced that they have reached some absolute understandings, they'll believe that they have captured the truth and then they become rigid. I think very few INTP's reach this stage though and become eternal fence-sitters or at least flip-flop and see-saw with a fragmented set of persona; I guess this can be achieved by INTP's and ENTP's because they are less likely to create a deep tandem between inner self - regarding morality and probably ethics - and their thoughts on... things and stuff.
Richard Dawkins is an ISTJ. One of many S's and F's in the scientific community mistyped as NT's. Being good at abstract theorizing isn't exclusive to NT.
You're right that these mental functions have limited evidence to support them. You're wrong in saying that they have no place in psychology. The term psychology is very broad and includes more than just empirical fields.
I love your ideas on the significance of the tertiary function; they've influenced my thinking on the types during my hiatus; I wish I had a better grasp on them when I made my own type videos. This is excellent work (as I've said before).
Your room and the light and Breeze through the window , reminds me summers of childhood
I'm so lazy with this stuff it's clear that you guys uploading these vids are far more well read than I am. You throw out all these terms; I learn.
you didn't write this down did you? but really it's really cool that your knowledge of the cognitive functions helps you tackle the discussion of ENTPs and INTPs.
Related to the beginning of the video, I love the system and how specific Socionics is, but I dislike the definitions and flcus on action rather than its underlying themes and frameworks, such as Se being "power" focused.
The audience laughing is at 12:35. I ask the same question, what's funny about that? I also struggle to see the humour although it might very well be a relief laughter from some audience members which cathced on :D What was the fun element I ask?
+VikingMovie I think they are laughing about the tweet. Maybe there was a screen.
+SpyMonkey3D aha yeahyeahyeah it must be, yeahyeahyeah
true story
*laugh track*
its only up to 9 minutes atleast though
So, the INTP builds a modest addition while the ENTP builds castles in the air...
Castles in the sky!
The video of Dawkins getting miffed has been removed BTW.
Why are people so obsessed with whether or not it perfectly matches the criteria of 'scientific' or not, when the entirety of the field of psychology itself is not scientific? It's like they 'feel' threatened by the MBTI and tried science as a 'faith' - if it cannot be explained in external concrete terms = it isn't scientific = therefore it isn't real.
However it certainly is real and the fact that it does work even though it cannot be explained by the limitations of science, gives it its validation.
that would eliminate all logical conclusions. if we go by only external concrete (immediately sensed) data then all of mathematics has to be discarded. It's abstract, all of it.
+NumbMonkE Hooray for rationalism and Hume's destruction of objectivity!
+John Barnes Not really big on rationalism either. Both empiricism and rationalism need integrating. You can't reject the outside world, nor can you reject man's ability to form abstractions.
+NumbMonkE You're not rejecting the outside world, you're rejecting your perception of the outside world which comes from your internal view which implies a subjective view. That's what you want to get rid of, so that you can create an objective view of the external world.
+PrincipalofPrinciples so you reject sense data? is that what you are saying? or are you saying that even if the sense data is correct we cannot have an objective perception of the world?
OMG, I Love Wolfgang Pauli!!!
You mention that Ti-doms repress Fe because it is imprecise. But what exactly about Extroverted Feeling is imprecise? What about registering affects within a situation is imprecise?
Imprecise is not how I would phrase it these days. It’s not fluid rather than rigid, is how I would say it these days.
great introduction.
I want to ask you about something important, which is when a person’s cognitive functions appear and are completed. I mean, at what age stage do they appear and complete?
Can you go into detail about the diffrences of the NFPs?
***** Yeah. I already have that "script" written.
Great!
I don't nearly enough about that.
That Richard Dawkins video ain't working :(
Jake from 2 & a half men
You took down the Ne crash video. I'm sad. I always used that to explain the concept to people. :L
I think it was this video that you said something along the lines of INTPs building systems whereas ISTPs don't as much. And that it had to do with tertiary Si. I don't know how much you've looked into functional charges, but do you think INTPs having -Ti and ISTPs having +Ti has more to do with that difference?
I've never come across the terms -Ti and +Ti (although they sound like Socionics terms). Care to elaborate?
They are probably socionics terms. From my little understanding, each quadra will use the functions differently than the overlapping functions in another quadra. If you google "Plus/Minus Functions and Quadra Values by Victor Gulenko" on the16types you should be able to find it. I would just link it, but i think it'll be marked as spam
+John Barnes
T blocked with N ---> -T and +N
T blocked with S ---> +T and -S
F blocked with N ---> +F and -N
F blocked with S ---> -F and +S
+John Barnes
en.socionicasys.org/teorija/dlja-novichkov/funkcii/znaki
after reading about the theory. No, I vehemently disagree.
"They have it in the tertiary position."
We adhere too strictly too often to a too (lol at this sentence) precise definition of the functions per type and reduce MBTI to a minimum quanta which is often too large as to obfuscate the truth.. perhaps out of our seemingly inherent tendency to categorise crudely as a temporary means of imperfect though usable understanding. Though with that said, I think a lot of these generalisations often hold quite true, and that the essence of the MBTI types hold quite firm.
The current model is being put under scrutiny and can be adapted as necessary according to the results of further examination. Are any of you of the opinion that an ENTP for example is capable of having a Ti function that overrides their Ne function or at least fights equally with it and can be argued to be not only the dominant function in the hierarchy but *also* the more developed function.
Of course, if we go past the standard layman MBTI stuff most of us know a bit about, there are sub types for every type no? MBTI Step 2 right? I really know virtually nothing about it though. Perhaps it goes down an avenue that encourages a less rigid take on function hierarchy or perhaps it tries to categorise too precisely and ends up being as harmful as it is useful. What I do know is that nobody really talks about the second step in any of these videos.
ISFP reporting in! Nah only kiddin'.
+TheOriginalGankstar I think the subtypes could be explained if ambivert was added to the mix. For one, INTPS aren't social and feel like outcasts ( My Dad is an INTP and he tells me this all the time) So an ENTP with high TI could be explained by ambiversion. For example, due to my highly devolved FI many would assume that I was an INFP despite being a total Extrovert. Although I do tend to flip flop between introvert and extrovert. Sometimes I can be so lost in my thoughts and ideas and stay alone for hours. Other times I can't survive without people. My se sucks and sometimes I'm barely conscious of the most obvious of objects or environmental changes. So technically, I would be ANFP based on that definition. Personally, I think if the full number of types was 24 that would make MBTI more expandable and much more explainable.
I definitely agree that we can expand the Myers-Briggs construct. I mean, it is the best source we have, though it being VERY good.
Excuse me , have you also taken down the ENTP video in which you had mentioned “ Wolfgang Pauli “ ?!
Because I thought it would be interesting to have an opportunity to debate you about his type ?!
IDRlabs mistyped him , he was rather an INTP , LII-Ti in Socionics terms .
There are several schools in socionics. It is not unified at all.
Hidden agenda (name is poor) between two types are bit different and core motivation is not the same. I want to be very exited and enthusiastic about an idea and not being loved.
I have had many Fi oops here and there while being excited about something. You really need Fi dominant people to point it to you to actually realize some of the flaws you are making with it. It is mind boggling actually. While everything goes smooth an INFP appears and starts to comment your style of interaction with others. Hard core analyzing is one of them. It is a flaw of creative function. Feeling followed by it might make it look a bit pathetic since you are not sharing the enthusiasm in a way recipients can relate to it. It is your own bubble with no explanations of the process. It is like: got it -> principle-> conclusions -> etc. That kind of style makes an INFP unease.
Let's look at it from ESTJ perspective: you can not do that because...
I can elaborate it further with them by adding more details but an INFP is completely lost. It is far worse when INFP observes your interaction with others.
ISFPs: everything I do or say makes them uncomfortable (too much absurdity and logic) and their talk makes me do facepalms internally...
**My school of socionics** :-)
You identify as ENTP, then? Do I have that correct.
+John Barnes The relation types should be considered more strongly considered. I have reason to believe that work well.
Apologies if you've answered this before, but what type are you?
entp
+AK-47 I felt like he is INTP. --INTP myself.
+AK-47 He talks like me.
***** Feeling is mutual ;)
Are you an entp? I reflect in the same way...
I think I love you 😍
You speak just like I do stop it.
I'm still on the fence here-I identify a lot with profiles of both, but have usually tested INTP. The HumanMetrics test put me at something like 60/40 I/E (slight preference), and I just took CelebrityTypes' ENTP or INTP test and got 53% ENTP 47% INTP. Also just noticed you posted this video on my birthday-funny coincidence.
+Frasier Linde took the HumanMetrics test again and got only 3% more I than E.
+Frasier Linde It might simply mean that you are somewhere in the middle. I don't think these are completely binary things. But, as you seem to already be doing, find full descriptions of both and see which one you more identify with or, to put it in a different way, which are you more comfortable with. I'm INTP btw
+Joel Smith I've decided I'm an INTP with stronger extroverted functions than most.
do you truely think dawkins is INTP?
Chino Mess yeah
Chino Mess He answers moral questions with to quote celebritytypes "logical certitude" as if it were the only possible answer, which is characteristic of repressed Fe. "Pathological" fear of indoctrinating/general lack of the didacticism of INTJs (the other type I've seen him listed as).
thanks for answering
+Chino Mess
Seems to be one who has come to very firm conclusions about many things. Once an INTP is convinced that they have reached some absolute understandings, they'll believe that they have captured the truth and then they become rigid. I think very few INTP's reach this stage though and become eternal fence-sitters or at least flip-flop and see-saw with a fragmented set of persona; I guess this can be achieved by INTP's and ENTP's because they are less likely to create a deep tandem between inner self - regarding morality and probably ethics - and their thoughts on... things and stuff.
+Chino Mess True NTPs don't give a shit
Richard Dawkins is an ISTJ. One of many S's and F's in the scientific community mistyped as NT's. Being good at abstract theorizing isn't exclusive to NT.
Nah
You do realize that the concept of "cognitive functions" has no real basis in psychology, right? Zero empirical support for this idea.
You're right that these mental functions have limited evidence to support them. You're wrong in saying that they have no place in psychology. The term psychology is very broad and includes more than just empirical fields.
And there is not zero support. The work of Dario Nardi, preliminary as it may be, does support the idea of functions and function axes.
John Sc
Its applicable and consistent just because its metaphysical doesnt mean its not real