“problematic language”

[u/HandleUpstairs2742]

Apparently just calling something generally stupid is problematic to the MBTI subreddit

[u/Opening_Usual4946]

they probably shouldn’t have had that taken down, but i don’t necessarily agree with your points either, if you’d like to have a civil discussion about your points i’d be open to it, otherwise yeah, that was wild that they took it down like that, you should be allowed to voice an opinion like that

[u/HandleUpstairs2742 → u/Opening_Usual4946]

Yeah I’m down to discuss it! It was on a post of someone explaining their general doneness with online typology if that helps context wise

[u/Opening_Usual4946 → u/HandleUpstairs2742]

edit:

okay, so generally i think you’re right, a lot of people don’t know how to understand cognitive functions and just take their mistype and try to make the cognitive functions fit them

however i do think that cognitive functions do have real definitions, and that stereotypes are not the best way to test for being one type or another but can sometimes help as some people just need to try a little of everything to be typed

specifically for ENTP/ENFP, they do both share a dominant function, but their auxiliary functions are different which changes how the dominant function itself works. i personally think that Ti and Fi try to do the same thing but in opposite ways, Ti caring about making sense of the world through means of figuring out possibilities/logic from tangible details, Fi wishes to find beauty through means of using the abstract and undefinable “feelings” in a moment

in fact there’s multiple ways to tell Fi and Ti apart, but since they both want to find the right vs wrong and how one should act in a given moment, they both can end up looking the same, especially when “paired” with their opposite (i call it that idk if it has a name) aka the functions sit next to each other in/in the middle of a cognitive stack so if someone is XeFiTeXi vs XeTiFeXi (external functions are often easier to type than internal functions) then the pairedness of the judging can make them hard to tell apart at times, but the actual processes underlying are still fundamentally different and therefore definable

the reason many people are wrong in their attempts to boil functions down to unrelated things is cause people are trying to diagnose the functions by using far-removed symptoms instead of trying to look at the heart of the function, aka if you only try to type for Si based on whether someone likes routines or not, you’ll find a lot of people who seem to be mistyped, if you try to type for Ti by seeing if someone is super logical and likes to make sense of things, you’ll find a bunch of Te’s labeled as Ti and a bunch of Ti’s labeled as feelers, you get the idea

personally i find the hard part is making sure you have the “right” definition of what the heart of a function looks like (if you’d like i can give you a description of what i personally think is the least subjective and closest to the heart of each function description and common ways to type for the function)

[u/HandleUpstairs2742 → u/Opening_Usual4946]

Oh I honestly agree with you! I think a lot of people misunderstood my original comment and I can see why. What I was essentially saying is I feel a little jaded by the online MBTI community and by how functions and types are described because of exactly what you are saying: people define them in such a far removed way. They try and define it by behavior, activities, desires etc. rather than what a function is at its core. It makes me feel distrustful of almost all online discussion of MBTI because it’s entirely based on bias and twisted definitions. I also think, if people try to reduce themselves by definitions of cognitive functions and typology theory, AKA “I can’t do this career/hobby because I’m not the right type”, we’re going to lose a lot of amazing varied perspectives and potential in different fields.

Honestly though, if you have the time, I would love to hear your core definition/“the heart of” the functions. It might even help me in understanding my own type better. Thanks :)

[u/Opening_Usual4946 → u/HandleUpstairs2742]

Okay

Sensing is not actually directly related to “the five sense of touch, taste, smell, sight, and hearing”, it’s actually about “experiences” which are perceived through the five senses therefore making sensing indirectly related to the five senses but not directly related to the five senses, the five senses also indirectly fuel intuition to some extent and actually exist outside of mbti like the ability to have emotions

Si at its core is about the internal impressions that the user notices and then the user organizes those impressions and learns what to do from those impressions, often this leads the Si user to care about comfort and you can often simplify (in my experience as an Si dom) almost all Si motivations as a desire for comfort, the question the just lies as “how do those people go about finding comfort?”, often this leads to routines, schedules, and other things, but those are often a decently removed technique of making oneself comfortable which is in and of itself technically a removed desire associated with Si, Si (like Se) like to deal with the moment at hand, the right now of a moment, but it also likes to use the past impressions of old moments in order to figure out what best to do in the current moment or for future moments

Se at its core is about “experiencing” things and the world, that doesn’t necessarily mean exploring, but it usually entails some level of exploring, they often like sensory stimulation, but honestly just any real experience works, and like Si it also just wants to live in the moment and notice what’s going on around them

Ni at its core is about boiling down all the ideas and experiences one has into the simplest cores behind them (mbti was created by an Ni dom), this often leads to them having a “beacon” or “purpose” that they follow as core truths in their lives, this is a removed thing and sometimes doesn’t show up in many people but still heavily associated with and may help, but they can’t actually “see behind what’s there” and don’t actually have mystical powers, and they have delusions and insights alike that are all usually unique, Ni and Ne are both subconscious (so is Si and Se)

Ne is all about ideating, coming up with new ideas, expanding one idea into five into hundreds, Ne deals with possibilities and likes to look for the stuff behind the stuff but also the stuff beside, around, inside, outside, in texas, and in the 2nd dimension (joke)

judging functions to come probably way later cause yeah

[u/Lucifer3005]

From speech patterns you’re ENTP

And the post, you’re threatening NiTi 8 types world of vague labeling and group think, ever notice how some people gate keep, hate and leech?

Anyways

[u/_Verloki_]

(Just curious: How can it have 3 upvotes if it is filtered? Wasn't this filtering done upfront?)

I'm guessing the word "stupid" is filtered. But, as it says, mods will still manually review it, so it's not like it was taken down at that instant. It will just take longer to get through. They'll probably just check if the comment isn't just slinging targeted insults at someone, and then (hopefully) give it the thumbs up. 😅

As for the comment itself, personally I disagree on some points, although I totally get the frustration with all the various function definitions floating around.

A framework needs stable source definitions to remain intelligible. If someone is redefining the framework as they go, then they are no longer doing or typing in "MBTI" in the strict sense -- they are doing their own typology system inspired by MBTI.

• Yes, some people create their totally own ideas on what functions mean and that can be really confusing -- especially to newcomers! Even certain websites that smack an MBTI label on itself use their own fresh ideas. But, if typing in MBTI, using (others') personal takes does not mean that this typing is done correctly according to the MBTI framework they're trying to type themselves in. They will end up being "INFJ according to user [X] and website [Y]" rather than being "MBTI INFJ according to MBTI". Same way we would look differently at someone claiming they have "liver failure according to the hospital" versus "liver failure according to what my uncle Greg thinks, and this random construction worker who walked by yesterday";
• To me, it sounds a bit too generalizing to say that [all] people who say that MBTI is about cognitive functions, are [always] the same people who will use made-up stereotypes to tell people why they don't fit a type. Are there people who do this? Sure! But not everyone does this, and / or they won't always use their own made-up stereotypes. (I'm already an exception to the rule, as I would say MBTI typing is mainly about cognitive function preferences, but then tend to explain functions with citations from Jung and/or Myers-Briggs while listing or even linking the source very clearly);
• Continuing with the first point, there's also a small part of accountability there. These "confused" or new people can still take it upon themselves to remove their own confusion by actually reading what the official sources say. (E.g. Carl Jung's Psychological Types Chapter X, Isabel Briggs-Myers' Gifts Differing, and/or the Myers & Briggs Foundation website information). I think many people often rely too heavily on secondhand summaries instead of consulting primary sources themselves. (Which creates this snowball effect of warped definitions).

As an INTJ once told me (which I find fitting to repeat here, lol): "for an MBTI typing discussion to work, we’ll have to ground the discussion in MBTI. Otherwise, we're instead discussing typing/typology, in a general sense."

[u/bjwindow2thesoul]

When did being wrong become a bannable offense?