It's possible for an INFJ to be more skilled in Ti than an INTP

[nanook]

i remember a guy from typC who was confused about typology in similar manner and he used to consider himself ISTP at the time, but has since then changed his opinion on his type in various funny ways. i have to say, k9b4, i don't see you delving allot into the process of things, you try to nail down the solid edges of things, whatever can be noted and compared like a fact, i notice this especially in your reading comprehension of what i write.

 

[k9b4]

i remember a guy from typC who was confused about typology in similar manner and he used to consider himself ISTP at the time, but has since then changed his opinion on his type in various funny ways. i have to say, k9b4, i don't see you delving allot into the process of things, you try to nail down the solid edges of things, whatever can be noted and compared like a fact, i notice this especially in your reading comprehension of what i write.

ok so what type do you think i am?

 

[nanook]

i don't know yet.

 

[k9b4]

i don't know yet.

im pretty confident that i most closely resemble ENTP

 

[TheManBeyond]

^ check the flexibility of your lower lip

 

[nanook]

lol, really, did you just come up with a theory about the significance of the lower lip? how? why?

 

[k9b4]

lol, really, did you just come up with a theory about the significance of the lower lip? how? why?

i dunno man i think hes just saying random shit

 

[nanook]

we were just talking about lips before, but not about lower lips. is your upper lip very tense, TMB?

 

[TheManBeyond]

i didn't want to bother you anymore so i thought it was the opportunity... could you post a picture of some relaxed outgoing lip? i don't know how it looks.

Spoiler

 

[TheManBeyond]

btw obviously not from a black person becuz it would be unfair and unclear.

 

[nanook]

lips are not so reliable as a cue, but tension in the upper lip might be a good cue for introverted feeling whereas extroverted feeling has more sideward expanding tension, which will often leave the upper lip relaxed, bouncing around, which makes it more likely that the upper lip looks swollen, but it all depends on various other factors and the lip is a secondary trait and not a reliable cue. extroverts have more pronounced communicative features, they show more teeth, have more expression in their eyebrows and half of them have chins that are even stronger than the stronger half of introverted chins.

should have been in bed 3 hours ago, i won't go deeper into this subject today.

 

[Architect]

No, but experience with academics helps bolster Ti.

Does it? I don't see Tom as having a less effective Ti than I do - actually it seems better in many ways, despite my degrees and him working as a repairman. All I have is some stored up skills and knowledge which Ti can use.

but whether an INFJ can use Ti to greater effect, ie be better in his/hers INFJ-way of using Ti than an INTP's INTP way. Which is fully possible.

Sorry I missed that. OK let's try that on for size, take Se. Can a tert. Se use it more effectively ("to greater effect") than a dominant Se?

Sorry I'm still struggling with that. Using something effectively means you use it skillfully, and to do this must use it often. If you mean "more effectively in a particular scenario" well then sure - but that's an artificial example. If you want to compare an educated INFJ and non educated INTP, and say the INFJ can pass the ACT better than the INTP, agreed. Is that using Ti better? I would contend no, it's not. The INFJ just wins due to an uneven playing field. Put them on an equal basis and the INTP would always win.

And vice versa, let's put it in reverse (I'll bring up this example). I used to tell my INFJ that I had a well developed Fe. I thought I had really developed it in music and when younger. Then I lived with a Fe aux. for many years and learned the true scope and range of a real Fe. She told me that she didn't say anything but found my statement rather dumb, and she was right.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Since I've been encouraged by K9B4 I'll add that this thread is a prime example of Ni and Fe fueled tertiary Ti prevailing over the Ne and Si fueled Dominant Ti of some other users.

The ones who are right are K9B4, Brontosaurie, Jennywocky and me. The rest of ya'll can go wander alone in emptiness til you lose your souls and suck a cock.

 

[cheese]

*EDIT
Archie:
Can you go into more detail about the true scope and range of a real Fe, and how your 'development' differed?

 

[Architect]

Since I've been encouraged by K9B4 I'll add that this thread is a prime example of Ni and Fe fueled tertiary Ti prevailing over Ne and Si fueled Dominant Ti.

The ones who are right are K9B4, Brontosaurie, Jennywocky and me. The rest of ya'll can go wander alone in emptiness til you lose your souls and suck a cock.

Actually I think partly (or maybe mainly) we're arguing terminology, we don't have common definitions.

My definition of a function, there are two parts to what we commonly call a function

• A hardwired part that isn't especially skilled but is psychic motivation, energy and desire (I say this is based in the cortex).
• Another part which is learned (resides in the neocortex).

I say that A leads leads to B, but that B isn't really a function, but reflects it. B translates A into the real world, and is a set of behaviors really. Thus a person can learn a function - B - but without A that is rarely or never as strong unless A is there to make it.

You guys have some other definition of a function, you'd have to tell us what that is.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Yeah I've been talking about that all along yao, there are as many versions of Ti as there are different types in which Ti features, and none is more "real" or "true" Ti than the other. Whereas you've been arguing from the perspective of Ti as it is in INTPs. Basically taking the questioned asked in the OP to be whether an INFJ can use his Ti better than an INTPs Ti if that INFJ uses his Ti like that INTPs or not. In which case of course the answer is no. But that wasn't the question. It was whether or not an INFJ could use Ti better than an INTP or not. To which the answer is yes because an INFJ could. It depends on a bunch of things of course, but it is possible and probably happens every now and then as far as I'm concerned, and similar things can happen with other types too.

Shit is situational. Experience and knowledge matter a lot and people have different experiences and knowledge, there will be times when one knows a lot more than the other about whatever they are talking about. There's IQ too, people do differ in IQ. There's socioeconomic background, race, sex all of that playing a part too. It matters cause it influences what functions you develop by encouraging certain behavior and discouraging other, and that's never completely equal. And there's nutrition and health too, mental as well as physical, drugs.

I dunno, I don't see why this would so damn rare. I'm sure INFJs get their Ni owned by other types too sometimes.

And this is also why I think it isn't meaningful to think of functions as working on their own, they always work in conjunction with other functions. The result is that you can only picture one form of Ti which also just so happens to be INTP Ti. You even linked an INTP using Ti and said can and INFJ do this in particular? Functions aren't used one at a time they are used together or in rapid succession.

 

[del]

So could INFJs have better Se than ESTPs?

 

[Cherry Cola]

While doing some very particular thing they've trained at which involves Se which the ESTP hasn't trained at. Anything which you can specialize in. Though it would not be the same kind of Se.

 

[Architect]

^Can you go into more detail about the true scope and range of a real Fe, and how your 'development' differed?

Are you asking me? Assuming so (I think I was the only one talking about Fe) ...

My story (you've probably heard before) was that I was a musician. Inferior grip - now I see that Fe was killing me, and for other reasons (plus just liking music) I became a classical musician. I became really good and soon had conductors and big name musicians screaming at me (music has it's own culture) to be more expressive. "Feel the passion" as I was playing a Brahms piece once. I didn't know what the fuck he was talking about, passion?

You see I got so far because I was the best technical player on the West Coast, but there wasn't a lot of emotion behind it, no interpretation. Anyhow so I developed it, had my "breakthrough moment" while playing Beethoven in Vienna, and also developed people skills along the way. With this I developed a sophisticated musical taste. Mahler, Chopin, Nielson, I felt this music, it resonated within me. My emotions resonated with the music.

But I hated giving concerts (I would fold within myself and never got past that) and left. But I still had all these skills, and fancied myself as having developed Fe. This was later when I came to realize I was actually an INTP and NOT and INFJ as I had thought in my music days (inferior grip, remember?). Along with this I married an actual INFJ, and spent the next 20 years seeing what Fe really is.

Fe is a judging function. INFJ's judge like crazy. They judge themselves and others. My wife said today "Well I'm having a fucked up day!" I couldn't see what was so bad about it, but the verbal (words are a strong conduit of Fe) emotional barrage, that is making a judgement and pronouncement is something I wouldn't do. At worst I'd say rather quietly "Well my day didn't go so well", and only in extreme cases. Her problem was over something trivial, but Fe blows it way out of emotional proportion (to my perspective).

She also discerns the emotions and states of mind of others. She's aware of my emotions WAY before I am. She's an antenna - she picks up on subtleties of emotion and intent of those around her that I'm oblivious to.

There are many other examples I can talk about if you're interested but that should give a taste. I had mistaken learned abilities to socialize and a sophisticated musical taste and interpretative abilities with Fe. But they're all a sham, oh my emotions are real, but I'm a piker to a real Fe user.

If you want a real life example of a dominant Fe use in classical music listen to Jacqueline du Pré

Look at that face - dominant feelers show it up into their eyes. Dominant thinkers do not, our faces are blank slates. No emotion shows, or rarely - another sign. And better is to listen to her. She pours her emotions out into her music and gives it to you. My god I can't do a tenth of that even at my peak.

I'm sticking to my guns here folks, I think you're all full of shit on this point. No it's not just my perspective bullshit either. If you say a teritary can out dominate a dominant then we don't have a theory, we have a mishmash.

 

[Cherry Cola]

I'm sure you could beat many an ISFJ and ISTJ with your Si though ; )

Jennywocky pointed out on the last page that comparison with an auxiliary versus an inferior function was irrelevant too. Inferiors are pretty damn weak.

 

[Architect]

I'm sure you could beat many an ISFJ and ISTJ with your Si though ; )

NO FUCKING WAY. Are you kidding me?

You might be kidding but this is exactly the point. I have a shitload of data stored up. I've lived a while and did a lot of stuff. Big deal.

I've got ISTJ co workers and ISFJ relatives. I could write a novel on how they use Si, god it tires me out just being around them. The connection with their past, their storage of details, their romanticizing of past events, they're blowing details way out of proportion (like current events). Drive me nuts and I actually HAVE Si.

Oh Cherry, I love you dear but you're such an INFJ shit. You guys get these holistic ideas, mash it around with a little teritary Ti and come out with pure goo sometimes. We still love you though, the world needs more goo.

 

[redbaron]

If we're measuring skilled by one's ability to complete tasks generally attributed to Ti in MBTI theory, then it doesn't really matter whether or not an INFJ can be "more skilled" in Ti than an INTP - since there's more than one way to do almost anything, anyone can become more "skilled" at (almost) any particular activity than another person with the right motivation, talent, practice, disposition and genetics.

If we're going to take MBTI theory seriously, the answer to whether or not an INFJ can be "better" at using Se than an ESTP is no. Yet not being better at Se doesn't mean that an INFJ can't be a better athlete than an ESTP*. Maybe it's unlikely to happen for a number of reasons relative to the typical lifestyle an Ni-dominant assumes, but it's certainly feasible within the context of MBTI.

So can an INFJ be "more skilled in" Ti than an INTP? No.

Can an INFJ be "more skilled in" various "Ti activities" than an INTP? Yes.

Yet if being good at various "Ti activities" doesn't constitute being skilled in Ti, then what does? At this point the only logical thing to do is to accept that an INFJ really can be "more skilled in" Ti than an INTP, even if it pretty much invalidates the functional component of MBTI theory.

*Unless we say that this isn't indicative of MBTI at all because with the same environmental factors and influences, every ESTP will always be a better athlete than every other INFJ.

So really the important question here is this:

Is the MBTI representation of cognitive functions and their ordering in the functional stack a legitimate representation of what human psychology really is?

If yes, it's impossible for an INFJ to be "more skilled in" Ti than an INTP.

If no, it's possible and you've just invalidated MBTI.

 

[del]

It seems like this argument hinges around definitions.

I would agree with Architect because, well, I've never thought of the functions as dicks you can pull out and measure. They are preferences. That's it.

Other people seem to be talking about something else entirely. In my limited understanding of Jungian typology, it's kind of meaningless to say someone is "better" at Ti than another person. Or at least, that's how I've always thought of it. Facility with a preference is not measurable or meaningful, only preference for one is.

 

[Cherry Cola]

So an INFJ athlete is not using Se?

 

[Architect]

So an INFJ athlete is not using Se?

Find us an INFJ athlete. Give links, YouTube videos, and the like. Go ahead, I dare you.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Why should I bother, we where not arguing inferior vs dom anyway. Besides you're dodging the question. I've seen you define function usage by activity before. Why so reluctant to do so now? The functions are defined by what they are good at doing, if we are to follow those definitions then we can't deny that INFJs doing Se things are using Se. But now the case was Tert vs Dom anyway. I'm sure INFJs can beat INTPs at Ti stuff, they most often wont. But it happens. Niels Bohr and stuff.

 

[Architect]

Jennywocky pointed out on the last page that comparison with an auxiliary versus an inferior function was irrelevant too. Inferiors are pretty damn weak.

You added this after I replied.

I think that's a weak point. The comparison was made as an example, not as a proof. Furthermore the tert. and inferior are different mainly because of the special position the inferior has, as the opposition to the dominant (it's the "devil" to the "angel" dominant). But they're both inferior, taking out that special nature I don't believe they're much different otherwise. They're both unconscious, undifferentiated and undeveloped. And they always will be.

Why should I bother, we where not arguing inferior vs dom anyway.

INFJ tactic. Your Ni always twists the argument around and avoids trying to prove anything.

Besides you're dodging the question. I've seen you define function usage by activity before. Why so reluctant to do so now?

Nope, neither. I defined it above, but you're not seeing it. I precisely defined functions above, and that includes activity/behavior. But as I clearly said, that's at best a reflection of the function. It's a set of learned behavior that mimics the function. But without the motivation (the "A" above) it doesn't have the force and weight of a true function).

 

[OrLevitate]

all your stuff, arch, is based on the infallibility of someone else's theories (and that's just, as you understand them) anyways, it's very evident that you're Te dom rather than Ti, with a lot of Si in there somewhere too. Ti would be much more ready to consider the possibility that others theories may be wrong, would usually be a sort of underpinning of their subjective theories. People with Ti are pretty much just smarter in the thinking regard; they have better analytical faculties to put to use. Whereas the Te and Si people tend to hinge on others, which works for them all the same.

if i lurked your history, would i find anything original? I think you may be better off just posting links to other pages, sort of like you're a search engine, because your text you add seems to add no value except ego-building off of having read about so-and-so's idea, and that they're right because if they're not then their theory isn't right, etc etc. I could very, very easily provide more data for this to get through to you, but I don't see the point.

I find it interesting how one can be interested in a theory for as long as you have (the mbti), with such vigor and consistency, yet never reach even slightly beyond it, as if you simply can't consider what someone else hasn't for you

 

[k9b4]

So could INFJs have better Se than ESTPs?

Quite possibly, but I admit it is unlikely.

I mean, possible for one particular INFJ to have a more developed Se than one particular ESTP.

The ESTP would have to be very stupid, and the INFJ very smart.

 

[redbaron]

Archi does actually have a very valid point here.

The answer to this is entirely dependent on whether or not MBTI is realistically valid or not. The entire premise goes against the foundations of MBTI theory.

 

[Architect]

When you guys argue with me rather than argue my points you just make it to my ignore list. Say whatever you want but I won't see it and don't care. I'm only interested in an intellectual debate and not a food fight.

Well I'm done for tonight, have fun.

 

[Cherry Cola]

You added this after I replied.

I think that's a weak point. The comparison was made as an example, not as a proof. Furthermore the tert. and inferior are different mainly because of the special position the inferior has, as the opposition to the dominant (it's the "devil" to the "angel" dominant). But they're both inferior, taking out that special nature I don't believe they're much different otherwise. They're both unconscious, undifferentiated and undeveloped. And they always will be.

Jennywocky added it on the last page. So it was made as an example not as an attempt to prove a point or as a proof the way you say it. Okay I'm sorry I should have just treated it as entirely superfluous then I suppose or what?

I don't believe terts are entirely subconscious, though I suppose it depends on what access you have to your subconsciousness.

INFJ tactic. Your Ni always twists the argument around and avoids trying to prove anything. .

INTP tactic. Your Ne always strays from the main point arguing superfluous points in order to confuse and wear your opponents down, particularly effective against Ni-doms who aren't as adapted to thinking on the spot.

Nope, neither. I defined it above, but you're not seeing it. I precisely defined functions above, and that includes activity/behavior. But as I clearly said, that's at best a reflection of the function. It's a set of learned behavior that mimics the function. But without the motivation (the "A" above) it doesn't have the force and weight of a true function).

What do you mean force and weight of a function? That's also besides the point. Would it be that function or not? INFJs do have Ti, it's not like they can't use it, it's not some silly shadow function.

 

[OrLevitate]

When you guys argue with me rather than argue my points you just make it to my ignore list. Say whatever you want but I won't see it and don't care. I'm only interested in an intellectual debate and not a food fight.

Well I'm done for tonight, have fun.

sorry my blunt honesty is offensive, honestly am. if i had it my way, i could talk to people about intellectual things, usually personality traits since this is what this forum is about, without having to worry about having offended someone.

 

[k9b4]

When you guys argue with me rather than argue my points you just make it to my ignore list.

WTF scroll up and read where you called me 'particularly stupid'

This one is particularly stupid or really young.

here u go i found it for u

 

[redbaron]

You're really young though.

 

[k9b4]

You're really young though.

But it's still an attack against my character, not my arguments.

Which is what architect is upset about, others attacking his character, not his arguments.

 

[redbaron]

Maybe the point is that your arguments are typified by people who are generally either really stupid or really young and it's not an attack against your character at all. Simply a comment on the nature of the whole idea, made based on a pattern of general observation of where the origin of such ideas come from in Architect's perspective.

 

[StevenM]

Perhaps an INFJ's Ni is being confused with an INTP Ti.

Or...

An INFJ gathers and communicates feeling judgement, and instinctively builds a holistic perception. Then consequentially, this gets the finishing touches and storage in a subjective rationalization.

An INTP gathers and communicates intuitive ideas, which is then constructed into subjective rationalization. Eventually, it gets the finishing touches and storage into subjective sensing experience.

So both types can 'get' it, it's just a different process it goes through.

An INFJ can be the professor, while the INTP the student. Or, it can also be the other way around. Or, perhaps, they are just colleagues.

 

[k9b4]

Maybe the point is that your arguments are typified by people who are generally either really stupid or really young and it's not an attack against your character at all. Simply a comment on the nature of the whole idea, made based on a pattern of general observation of where the origin of such ideas come from in Architect's perspective.

Lol it is an attack against my character.

Maybe the attacks against architects character aren't attacks against his character and are simply observations also? rofl

If I observe a stupid person posting a stupid post, and I say:

'holy fuck that post is very stupid and so are you'

Is that an attack against the stupid person's character or simply an observation?

redbaron that post was really stupid and you are stupid and probably very young. I think you were probably dropped on your head when you were a baby because of how stupid you are

(not an attack against your character, just an observation made from my perspective)

 

[Brontosaurie]

The entire premise goes against the foundations of MBTI theory.

no it doesn't.

Ti-dominance means a personal preference for trying to analyze things independently and autonomously. it says nothing absolute - and certainly not externally in comparison to others - about someone's skill in doing so, even though of course we'd be surprised not to find a correlation.

people are not equal. people are not 1 constant quota of psychic mana points split up in 16 different configurations and then end of story.

archie's old "i was a classical musician" anecdote is an overblown narrative, explanatory tunnel vision.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

people are not equal. people are not 1 constant quota of psychic mana points split up in 16 different configurations and then end of story.

What about the soul? People are equal before the creator. Jesus loves all!
...
If you find a way to define and measure the Ti output, then surely enough you can measure everyones Ti output empirically and probably establish that down syndrome INTP's are worse off compared to INFJ's at Ti.

Now how would the Ti output be defined empirically so that it would be real and not simply conceptual as the whole of mbti?

 

[OrLevitate]

lolooloooool

 

[Brontosaurie]

What about the soul? People are equal before the creator. Jesus loves all!
...
If you find a way to define and measure the Ti output, then surely enough you can measure everyones Ti output empirically and probably establish that down syndrome INTP's are worse off compared to INFJ's at Ti.

Now how would the Ti output be defined empirically so that it would be real and not simply conceptual as the whole of mbti?

i dunno, hard to measure such a complex feature. still there's no reason to assume that personality type places it in some absolute range of competency.

 

[Architect]

Jennywocky added it on the last page. So it was made as an example not as an attempt to prove a point or as a proof the way you say it. Okay I'm sorry I should have just treated it as entirely superfluous then I suppose or what?

I didn't think that point was relevant in the context, but anyhow ...

INTP tactic. Your Ne always strays from the main point arguing superfluous points in order to confuse and wear your opponents down, particularly effective against Ni-doms who aren't as adapted to thinking on the spot.

Touché! This is a Ni-Ne battle, I get it. I see myself as bringing in supplementary points, painting in the large picture, while you're whirling around a singular holistic point.

Though actually I'd disagree with Ni-doms and thinking on the spot. Maybe you guys do it better than us (you probably do), but not by much.

What do you mean force and weight of a function? That's also besides the point. Would it be that function or not? INFJs do have Ti, it's not like they can't use it, it's not some silly shadow function.

No that IS the point. You're just talking about what I'd call superficial behaviors. You are saying a INTJ can out INTP an INTP, and I'm saying they can ape one at best. It's an inferior function which by definition means it's weaker. You're redefining things, saying "Oh yeah, sometimes it's weaker and sometimes it's stronger" and claiming that's the theory, and you're giving no evidence to it being true.

Look at this argument, you still haven't even told us what you mean by a function! Or given a single example of an INFJ athlete. How can we have a debate with that?

 

[redbaron]

Ti-dominance means a personal preference for trying to analyze things independently and autonomously. it says nothing absolute

That's what it means to you. To other people functions aren't just a personal preference, but actually define ability. Being Ti-dominant means that you have a huge advantage in terms of ability to analyse and problem solve. So much so that with the exception of rare circumstances, an INFJ will not ever be more skilled at using Ti than an INTP.

Thinking people make decisions based on logic, so the Introverted thinking function allows a person to categorize and analyze data. It is the ability to identify inconsistencies, know how things work and problem-solve.

Using introverted Thinking is like having an internal sense of the essential qualities of something, noticing the fine distinctions that make it what it is and then naming it.

Someone with introverted thinking can find out how a car and all its parts work by relating it to some other system, such as a computer. They have the ability to find commonalities in seemingly unrelated things.
Introverted Thinking is also great at troubleshooting. Someone with Ti can analyze something, figure out where the problem areas are, and fix them rather quickly.

In these descriptions the existence of Ti as an absolute is obvious. Ti users don't just prefer to analyze things, but they actually notice more and have more ability to complete such tasks.

A further description reads:

once a Ti user figures out the whole system, everything clicks. They can see how the car and motor works, and how it all fits together. They have created a map and an internal framework, which could be applied to understanding how engines in other machines work. Pieces of this framework could also be used to understand seemingly unrelated concepts, like how a plumbing system works, or how computer programming languages interact with hardware.

According to this, an IxTP literally has more ability to conflate frameworks between various systems than others. Similarly ISxJ's don't just prefer to use Si - they're actually better at it than other types. Which is Architect's point (correct me if I'm wrong).

There are lots of different viewpoints on MBTI but he's really correct. Unless you actually accept functions as being indicative of real ability, you may as well not bother with MBTI at all and just look at the whole plethora of other indicators that make up a human being without bringing in functions. And yet people are frequently finding the MBTI definitions of functions useful for understanding people, so it's clear that MBTI does have some form of predictive capability.

So the answer to the question depends on whether or not you accept functions as being actual abilities or simply preferences. That would be a more interesting argument actually.

 

[Brontosaurie]

functions can be "indicative of real ability" while allowing for overlap. assuming some correlation between preference and skill is pretty much a given, but assuming that every Ti-dom uses Ti better than every Ti-aux or every Ti-tert or even every Ti-inf is a stretch unless you also assume that people have equal capacities and equal circumstances - which is clearly false.

you guys are looking for way too much magic in typology. and who are these "other people" redbaron? to me it seems you and architect are in the minority here.

 

[ae1905]

I think people here who begin with MBTI are putting theory before facts. It is a patently obvious fact that there are INFJs who use Ti more skillfully than many INTPs. I cited Niels Bohr as one example. Jung, himself, if he was INFJ most assuredly used Ti more skillfully than many INTPs. He is even typed as INTP by many. So the only question that remains is not "can they?" but "is this fact consistent with MBTI?". And I don't see why it isn't. It's obvious to me that intelligence amplifies the functions. Einstein, with an IQ of 170 (or whatever it was) was a more proficient user of Ti than most INTPs who have more modest IQs. That is the effect of IQ. So Bohr, who was also a genius, would have had a similarly amplified Ti that surpassed many INTPs'.

Where's the mystery in all of this? Smart people are more able users of their functions. Da.

 

[ae1905]

You can also examine this question by comparing INTPs to ENTPs who have auxiliary Ti. Aux is more able than tert but is still less competent than dom. Yet, I'm sure we all know very smart ENTPs who can out-argue many INTPs. Richard Fenynman was an ENTP and a pretty bright one. Who doesn't think he was a more skillful user of Ti than most INTPs?

 

[redbaron]

assuming that every Ti-dom uses Ti better than every Ti-aux or every Ti-tert or even every Ti-inf is a stretch unless you also assume that people have equal capacities and equal circumstances - which is clearly false.

Who's even assumed that?

I think it's already been conceded that allowing for circumstances it's possible. Architect just thinks that those circumstances are exceedingly rare so as to be outliers, whereas other people think that it's actually quite common.

you guys are looking for way too much magic in typology. and who are these "other people" redbaron? to me it seems you and architect are in the minority here.

Huh? I haven't even put forward my opinion, I just find the discussion interesting. I'm often one of the first people to criticize generalized and/or absolutist approaches to MBTI, but I think there's better points made in the thread that deserve attention.

I'm assuming that other people also wrote the descriptions on websites with the wording of function equating to ability. Maybe they were written by llamas instead.

 

[Cherry Cola]

No that IS the point. You're just talking about what I'd call superficial behaviors. You are saying a INTJ can out INTP an INTP, and I'm saying they can ape one at best. It's an inferior function which by definition means it's weaker. You're redefining things, saying "Oh yeah, sometimes it's weaker and sometimes it's stronger" and claiming that's the theory, and you're giving no evidence to it being true.

Look at this argument, you still haven't even told us what you mean by a function! Or given a single example of an INFJ athlete. How can we have a debate with that?

If that is the point then why wont you be clear about it? You're refusing to answer the question of whether an INFJ doing Ti stuff is using Ti or not. If he is your argument fails. Or whether an INFJ doing something athletic is using Se or not. It doesn't matter that it's not the same "force and weight" so long as it is a case of said function being used.

Also Dario Nardi's brain scans paint a more complex and nuanced picture of how the functions work than you've been doing. So I'm not really buying it.

Finally, regarding your post about Si: It sure sounds to me like you're better at Si than your Si relatives, you use it differently but it certainly seems to work better for you! ; ) Also I don't just get a bunch of ideas, I build on ideas slowly over time. Getting a bunch of ideas.. that's what Ne does.

Meh, I'm out of steam now. Need to mull this over. Yesterday I was high, arguing was so effortless.. today I don't care and nothing comes to mind lol.