Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Attitude
The function descriptions in the stickies here are okay, but don't seem
to go into a lot of depth or give many examples. I will attempt to
improve them here. Sorry if any of this is repeated from stuff that's
been posted before; I just tried to cover everything.
He said that there are two styles of Perception: Sensing (which deals
with immediate, concrete, tangible sensory impressions) and iNtuition
(which deals with abstract patterns and relationships between things or
ideas, and other non-tangible information.)
There are also two styles of Judgment: Thinking (which deals with
impersonal logic and structure) and Feeling (which deals with
personal/interpersonal ethics and morality.)
objective ideal, so they attempt to make the inner self more like the
outer world. Their focus is broader but more shallow--they can see a
wide range of different information at once, but in less detail.
(For example, Ne can see the next few steps down many different
paths at once, but Ni sees all the way to the end of one path at a time.)
The E/I and P/J letters in Myers-Briggs types are not actually cognitive
functions; they simply tell us which directions our functions (S/N and
T/F) are oriented and which ones are dominant.
I/E tells us which of those two attitudes is dominant. If you are IxxP
your Ti/Fi is dominant and your Ne/Se is secondary (ExxP is the
reverse.) If you are IxxJ, your Ni/Si is dominant and Te/Fe is secondary
(ExxJ is the reverse.)
Ne = xNxP
Se = xSxP
Ni = xNxJ
Si = xSxJ
Te = xxTJ
Fe = xxFJ
Ti = xxTP
Fi = xxFP
------------------------------
as-you-go, direct experiential approach (in this way they are similar to
Ne) but they are more focused on what is immediately tangible than on
what their surroundings might be changed into. They usually pay a lot
of attention to their physical appearance and are very good with
reading body language and using it to immediately size up a person or
a situation and respond instinctively. They can be quite impulsive and
prone to overindulgence in sensory pleasures, but they also know how
to work a crowd and they tend to make themselves into reflections of
current popular trends--whatever will make an impact.
---------------------------
Next, the introverted Perception (Pi) attitudes. These are dominant for
IxxJ types, secondary for ExxJ, tertiary for IxxP and inferior for ExxP:
Strong Ni users like being the person behind the scenes who pulls all
the strings (even better if most people don't even realize it) and
understands the dynamics of everything on a deeper level than
everyone else. They are threatened by the idea that there might be
any perspective or angle they cannot see, and as such they sometimes
overestimate their own ability to fully grasp and work around the
attitudes of others.
For another example, Isaac Newton (INTJ) invented calculus and didn't
bother telling anyone about it for 20 years. Ne would have been out
showing the idea to others and changing it based on their reactions-but not Ni!
Si also does some really cool stuff like perfect pitch...I have one ISFJ
friend (Si dominant) who can tap into his past sensations of what a
particular note sounded like and use it to identify some note he hears
now as a G#. That's amazing to me...as an Ne dom I only understand
notes in terms of their relationship to other notes in a larger pattern;
Josh just taps right into his detailed sensory memory and can identify
the note by remembering what it sounded like before, on its own.
-----------------------------
Next, the extroverted Judgment (Je) attitudes. These are dominant for
ExxJ types, secondary for IxxJ, tertiary for ExxP and inferior for IxxP:
Strong Te users are efficiency experts. They are typically very good at
translating a theoretical idea into a fluid, external process that gets
effective, measurable results that can be repeated and verified on
schedule. They usually do very well in management positions that
allow them to focus on process over theory in order to maximize
efficiency and bring about the desired goal while expending the
smallest possible amount of resources (especially time.)
Fe leads people to adjust, hide or set aside entirely their own emotions
in favor of fitting the emotional needs of the broader groups that are
important to them. This leads to a certain respect for the common
consensus among those important groups regarding interpersonal
behavior and treatment of others. If you were to criticize someone's
behavior from an Fe standpoint, it would be from the standpoint of,
"Your behavior is inconsistent with the group's standards--most people
would consider it wrong or inappropriate." Fe appeals to the collective
morality of the whole; the fact that "most people would agree" serves
as externally objective evidence to support Fe's moral standpoints.
People with strong Fe are typically good at saying just the right thing
that fits in with the moral expectations of the audience. For this reason
Fe tends to make great politicans because strong Fe users often make
outstanding, charismatic public speakers who can play off the
emotions of others to rally groups toward the desired cause. They are
excellent at organizing, leading and delegating tasks to others with an
interpersonal style that gets the job done while still appearing socially
appropriate and respecting the emotional needs of others (so long as
those needs are reasonable within the group's objective framework of
ethics.) They understand how to perform the social/cultural
responsibilities expected of them and they expect others to do the
same, and if you're not fulfilling these responsibilities they're very good
at appealing to the crowd to deliberately make you look like an asshole
in front of everyone. ("Look everyone, this guy doesn't fit with our
collective moral ideals!")
others in service of the good of the larger group, and for ignoring
objective standards on ethics in favor of purely personal ones.
The whole idea behind Ms. Manners is very Fe--Fi would wonder why
anyone cares about any external consensus on ethics, because to Fi
ethics are purely subjective. Fe is concerned with adjusting to the
ethical standards as established objectively by the groups it feels are
important.
-------------------------
And finally, the introverted Judgment (Ji) attitudes. These are dominant
for IxxP types, secondary for ExxP, tertiary for IxxJ and inferior for ExxJ:
Ti: What logical relationships necessitate this system working the way
it does, and how can I make them make sense to me?
So let's say you're playing baseball. Te would tell us that if the runner
doesn't reach the base before the ball gets there, he's out--period.
That's objectively verifiable and can be shown logically, through
external empirical evidence/consensus of experts that it is always the
case, and it can be quantified and measured precisely without any
personal emotions getting involved. (You can see why so many TJs are
research scientists, especially NTJs.)
But Te won't do us any good when we're the runner trying to decide
whether to steal 2nd base or wait for another hit. The situational logic
in this case is subjective Ti because it requires us to reason out what
makes sense at the moment according to our direct experience--the
logic at play here cannot be precisely quantified in an externally
verifiable manner.
The ability to express one's personal feelings and inner self freely and
maintain a strong sense of personal uniqueness and individuality is of
utmost importance to Fi. (It's also important to Ti, but for different
reasons and in different contexts.) I have found that many Fi users
dislike typology in general because they feel that "putting people into
boxes" suppresses their sense of personal identity, and that people are
too unique to be categorized so easily.
Fi doms are ethical perfectionists in the same way Ti doms are logical
perfectionists. They seek a sense of internal balance and harmony with
their surroundings that feels right in their own individual way. Note that
introverted judgment (Ti/Fi) seeks depth and specificity while
extroverted judgment (Te/Fe) seeks broad applicability. Ti wants to
define exactly what is logically correct under an extremely specific set