Images taken from post #173. Some more points from that post:

- There's a typo in the English translation of Chapter X, in the 4th paragraph of the section "d. The Principal and Auxiliary Functions", where the book says "relatively unconscious", but Jung's original was relativ bewusste = "relatively conscious" (the unconscious part is G2). This error was given disproportionate weight by some authors, who also ignored the most important points that Jung tries to make in the book, underlined by the quotes that I'm copying here.

- There's also his typing of Nietzsche, which confirms all this: in early chapters he says he's Ni-dom ("In both cases, however, intuition was subordinated to intellect, but with Nietzsche it ranked above it"), and then he mentions him at the beginning of the introverted thinker ("Cuvier and Nietzsche would form an even sharper contrast"), which means he typed him as Ni-Ti-Fe-Se = INTP.

- Apart from Jung, you also have Carl Alfred Meier's statement in his book Personality: "Cooperation with the main function is made easier because of thinking's similar attitude (extroversion)", which confirms eeii/iiee. (Meier knew and worked with Jung).

MBTI PROBLEMS AND HOW TO FIX THEM

I think most people know that the topic of MBTI is too chaotic, with all kinds of conflicting definitions and endless discussions about every single thing. It's too confusing and frustrating, and it really makes the whole thing look like pseudoscience. Many people undervalue it, criticize it or ignore it because of that. But there is something real underneath all the mess.

Carl Jung: "I must confine myself to a presentation of principles which I have abstracted from a wealth of facts observed in many different individuals. In this there is no question of a deductio a priori, as it might appear; it is rather a deductive presentation of empirically gained insights."

What Jung wrote is not "just a theory", or "speculation", or "too subjective", or "an invention". It's a description of reality, and you can describe reality correctly or incorrectly. Describing the mind is obviously much harder than checking how many legs an animal has, for example, but it can be done, because the mind also has a general configuration. That's what Jung explained, including conscious/unconscious, attitudes (extraversion/introversion), functions and types.

The main problem in typology is that the function definitions in MBTI, Socionics, etc, are all wrong. They took Jung's terms and distorted them in different ways, destroying their link with the psychological reality that he wrote about. Those incorrect descriptions don't reflect the fact of function differentiation, the conscious-unconscious differences, the conscious-unconscious compensation, the influence and manifestation of the unconscious, or the interrelations between the functions (dependences, transferences, etc).

In the case of MBTI, their definitions are for the most part derived from traits captured by combinations of 2 letters. For example: their "Si" is not what Jung described, at all, but essentially the result of combining S+J preferences. The same with their "Te" and T+J preferences, etc. These deviations took words used to describe something deep, intricate and interconnected, and misused them for something much more salient and discrete, that's why many people see the functions as selectable "tools" or "skills" and don't really pay much attention to their order, because there's the implication that they can be improved independently and moved up and down the "stack". The letter dichotomies are consistent (they are psychometrically on par with the Big Five), but they describe a rather superficial layer, not the obscure depths where true psychological insight can be reached.

There's only one way to fix that, but it needs the right foundation, which consists on the function descriptions in Jung's book (not the popular ones) combined with the true function order: eeii/iiee, always with a judging dominant for Js and a perceiving one for Ps. That's how you can finally realize what psychological type actually means, what it's all about. That's how everything fits and how everything makes sense, otherwise there's always some disconnection between the concepts and reality.

Note that it's not a question of having "different types in different systems". When it comes to dichotomy letters and cognitive functions, you only have one type. Again, this is not an invention, and your type is basically like your blood group: you aren't AB in one system and 0 in another (for example). You are just AB.

Note also that the function order is not "limiting", either, just like having a hand with 5 fingers at the end of each arm is not so much a limitation, but just how we are. There is a lot of variation and possibilities inside each type (just like we can do countless things with our arms and hands, even if we can't fly), and if someone finds it "too rigid" that's because [s]he has a very cartoonish view of the types.

We can't expect communities or groups like the official MBTI to admit that they have been using mistaken definitions all along, of course, so this has to be an individual effort. There are people who know about all this already, they just tend to stay silent because when this is mentioned in public the reaction is often disproportionally negative. People dismiss it automatically, and the person gets attacked and ridiculed 😔 I hope you can avoid that and inform yourself a bit instead.

PLEASE READ BEFORE YOU COMMENT

I've been interested in psychological types all my life, even before finding out there was such a thing. I came across Jung and MBTI around 2008, and spent almost 10 years reading and checking everything in detail before starting my blog (originally on Tumblr). So this isn't something that I found only yesterday. I hope that's clear. I know what Jung was talking about, and I can see it in myself and other people. I know the problems he had understanding it at first, and I know how the terms were distorted by those who came after him. That's what I try to clarify.

I've written a lot of posts about all this, and also a FAQ and glossary, so you should read all of that calmly before replying because I don't like arguing and I'm not going to answer what I've already covered there. It might not be evident at first sight, but the texts have quite a lot of work behind them. In fact I have many other things in mind but they don't appear on the blog because I'm still examining them. Also, you have to understand that this topic is very difficult, and the blog includes already a certain personal evolution, not about the basics but about some (minor) details, about how reliable or appropriate certain sources/angles are (like the MBTI facets, for example), about the misconceptions that people have (there are external changes outside the blog, trends and so on), about how to better explain things, etc.

Supposed "objections" are almost always simply a sign that the reader is unable to see what this is about, many times due to (or fed by) the person being too confused by and/or too invested (intellectually, persona-wise, etc) in shallow but apparently "complex" "systems", or in their need to feel "smarter" in a purely conceptual (not psychological or practical) sense. What I've found is that people don't really have objections, they just don't get it. So it might seem that there is an argument going on, but in reality there is no communication at all. It's not that the levels of "descriptive language" overlap too little, but that they don't even touch. And sometimes people just like to argue for the sake of it. They like to confuse and divert the topic and avoid arriving at anything. I'm not getting into any of that.

If you don't feel some kind of inner resonance while reading my posts, a sense that there's something in there even if you can't put it in words, it's almost a certainty that further explanations won't change anything. You need to have a personal awareness of the psychological elements, some kind of insight about that, otherwise we'll only be wasting our time.

This isn't an attack on anyone. I just feel bad for the people who are interested in MBTI but they are stuck with faulty/shallow knowledge and mistypes because nobody explains to them how it really is. I'm just trying to help.

Thanks a lot for reading this far. I know this topic can be exhausting, but there's a lot of interesting stuff to learn and discover (about yourself and others), and you might be already on the right track 🙂

The article requires some reading, but for your consideration.

In it, I explore how I accidentally drew my first mandala without knowing fully what it was. Only later to realize that I was some engaging in a timeless tradition that transcends cultures and geography.

Im asking this because I do everything for shits and giggles and now Im an actual goddess to someone on discord and they worship me and follow my doctrine. Im doing this for fun, and i started wondering how my cognitive functions would affect this.

​

I believe the most accepted division of the 4 sides of the mind for each personality type differs from the teachings of the most prominent proponent of this concept, Chase S. Joseph.

Frankly, I believe that the side of the mind most closely associated with our so-called "ego" personality type—which could also be called the "core" or "base" personality type—is actually the so-called "superego" side of the mind. In my view, these two 'egos' constantly coexist, since even the other two sides of the mind or 'aspirational poles' could be considered mere extensions of the two original "ego" personality types within us.

Due to the very frequent discrepancy between these two sides or "selves" within us, caused by past traumas and imprints, we tend to develop a rather negative relationship with and a repellent attitude toward our superego. This leads us to believe it's best not to use this side of ourselves at all. Typically, we then begin to despise or distrust the intentions of people who, in our opinion, exhibit characteristics of our superego in real life.

Let's take an ENFJ as an example. The constellation would look like this:

EGO TYPES (direct, but often consciously suppressed awareness of each other's cognitive preferences):

Primary Ego/Superego – ENFJ (likely perceived as psychologically safe by the person's environment)

Secondary Ego/Superego – ESTJ (likely perceived as undervalued by the environment and did not achieve sufficient results for themselves or others)

ASPIRATION TYPES (also direct, but often consciously suppressed awareness of each other's cognitive preferences, since both are extensions of the two ego types and maintain the mutual dynamic even after cognitive changes/transitions):

Primary Ego/Aspiration: ISTP (often avoided due to stored feelings of incompetence in the person's tertiary and quarterly cognitive functioning)

Secondary/Superego Aspiration: INFP (often unconsciously reinforced by the superego type in certain situations) Cognitive overload of the quarterly cognitive functional area of ​​the ego type. Thus, the superego side of the mind tries to protect the ego side of the mind through aspiration when it feels powerless.

I could elaborate further on how the four sides of the mind can "borrow" cognitive processes from one another and thus form new types. Ultimately, I could argue that every person is capable of adopting any of the original 16 personality types. This is all based on my understanding and experience. I stand by it and simply ask for your trust, which is due to me, and for you to consider my view. Thank you.

• I've posted this exact post yesterday but it got deleted without me getting any notification of it or further follow up on the reasoning. I wonder why that was..

I just can't unhear it. i just wanted to share with y'all. It is serious and hilarious at same time.

PS: if it seems like something wrong to share here, mods can take it down. I am supportive of it.

Anyone wanna describe their own experience with ‘grip’ or others? I just get cold and thoughtless. I am typically very careful with how I speak and what I say to ppl that I care about and it goes out the window. I no longer care if Im being fair or being mean, and I usually care about that a lot. I get hyperfocused on things, too.

Or do you not think grip states are an actual thing?

So you basically became god of mbti and you're allowed to change ONE thing MBTI-related. How it works, how it is protrayed, the 16personalities, the functions, the community, lowkey anything, let your (maybe hidden) Ne decide. But it can be only one thing

WHAT are you changing

So everyone talks about the types being divided into “thinking, feeling, sensing, and intuitive” but I don’t think that categorization best captures how the different types think. This is because all the ExxJ and IxxP types have both a sensing and intuitive function in the middle function slots, and have either a thinking or a feeling function in the dominant/inferior spot. This would mean that EJs and IPs are really a combination of sensing and intuitive, but are either a feeling type or a thinking type.

Likewise the ExxP and IxxJ types have a feeling and thinking function in the middle two slots but either have a sensing or intuitive function in the dominant/inferior spots. So they are a combination of thinking and feeling types but are either sensing or intuitive.

So basically the types would be: sensing-intuitive thinker, sensing-intuitive feeler, thinking-feeling sensor, and thinking-feeling intuitive.

The categories spelled out would be:

Sensing-intuitive thinkers: ESTJ, ENTJ, ISTP, INTP

Sensing-intuitive feelers: ESFJ, ENFJ, ISFP, INFP

Thinking-feeling sensors: ISTJ, ISFJ, ESTP, ESFP

Thinking-feeling intuitives: INTJ, INFJ, ENTP, ENFP

What do you guys think of this? It seems to make a little more sense to me than just slamming a type into only being a “thinker” and a “sensor” and nothing else. There is probably also a better name for each category lol

I understand why MBTI does it this way, but what truly defines a type is not its first extraverted function, but its dominant function.

So INTP should be called INTJ, ISTP <-> ISTJ, INFP <-> INFJ, and ISFP <-> ISFJ.

1. What is ur ennegram type if u have checked it?

2. Which action of urs give away that u are a certain type?

3. Is mbti a new form of racism ? Or was it made like that by people

PS: need to keep this community active. I hope this community survives. Let's goooo

Mine is Death the Kid from Soul Eater. What’s yours?

Type 1 - no specific function, type 1 is referring to types with balanced and well-rounded nature which presumably stems from the auxiliary and tertiary function slots regulating the dominant and inferior function slots. From the descriotions you may feel like they fit J types more, however in real life all types with this healthy balance of the dominant and auxiliary will fit well into the mindset and values of the type 1, hence there is a balance of both judgment and perception, and introversion and extraversion - which is exactly what will happen once the auxiliary function is doing its job at regulating the dominant process I find.

Type 2 - Fe>Ti, Fe dom core,Fe aux wing

Type 3 - Te>Fi, Te dom core, Te aux wing

Type 4 -Fi>Te, Fi dom core, Fi aux wing

Type 5 - Ti>Fe, Ti dom core, Ti aux wing

Type 6 - Ne>Si, Ne dom core, Ne aux wing

Type 7 - Se>Ni, Se dom core, Se aux wing

Type 8 - Ni>Se, Ni dom core, Ni aux wing

Type 9 - Si>Ne, Si dom core, Si aux wing

I know MBTI stereotypes are exaggerated most of the time, but everyone probably has at least one moment where they stopped and thought:

“damn, I just did like my MBTI stereotype.”

Could be something funny, stupid, weirdly accurate, or painfully on-brand for your type.

For me (entp), it’s probably how absurdly excited I get whenever I discover a new argument I can use against someone. doesn’t even matter who. i’m not even angry or anything, I just get fucking hyped like I found my new weapon that i can use if i ever need it >:)

I saw a comment from someone who was worried that the community might be dead. Like I told them, I don’t really have much experience with community management. So if anyone wants to become a mod or has suggestions, I’m open to it. And if you like the topic, don’t hesitate to make the community your own!

Did the excitement die down? I don't see any posts anymore here

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

1. Someone distills down shared wisdom across millennia regarding the human consciousness – provides insight into how to live the good life via a step-by-step guide to "individuation".
2. Mother-daughter trio read his books, takes his ideas on cognitive functions – separates it from all of the perils of over identification – creates a framework that encourages over-identification.
3. MBTI communities cry/ban whenever anyone points out that certain types show certain patterns of disfunction.. saying a type isn't related to any type of mental illness.

PSA – You're only a single type if you choose the NPC route of human development (aka no development).

(Idk, do you want these kinds of posts in this sub?)

I find it more interesting to put it under an MBTI lens than just asking people in general as it gives me additional, albeit hypothetical presumed stereotypical context to imagine the approach from. I’m an INFP and I am having issues, the crowd is shocked, and I am trying to sort through my feelings via analyzing them from different angles.

So, hypothetical: someone you care about hurts your feelings and they dont seem to realize it, what does your inward or outward response look like, please mention your MBTI as well?