Transitioning from Myers-Briggs Jun 23, 2013 11:00:40 GMT -5 by Auburn immortal, TheLogicFan, and 7 more like this
Post by Auburn on Jun 23, 2013 11:00:40 GMT -5
Jungian theory, being a theory on the collective mind of humanity necessitates a comprehension of the entire context of humanity and the specific placement of any one human within that context comes second to understanding the principles that create that context. As such it is dangerous to have a system whose comprehension begins with oneself as the center-point (as systems like mbti encourage). My suggestion to those who are curious as to how all this comes together and/or who are confused as to their own type -- is to start with what one does know, and work outward from there. Eventually one's own type will become clear in the context of the whole.
Transitioning from MBTI : It would be ideal to read the book Psychological Types first, as that alone would dispel a great deal of the confusion with MBTI. And anyone who reads Psychological Types will immediately see that what Jung meant by Te+Si is not at all what MBTI defines as "ESTJ" (and so forth for all other types) and it'll become apparent that to a great level ....MBTI is by extension also not compatible with CT as a simple 1:1 transition.
But the other side of the matter is that MBTI does relate somewhat to CT and this'll be the focus of this thread. In understanding that a great deal of the typology community is accustomed to the Myers-Briggs approach, I find it most reasonable to meet in the middle, and work outward to better understanding. So I'll be starting first with listing 8 individuals, one of each lead cognitive type, who MBTI and CT agree with as far as their typing. I'll then explain why that typing is correct from a CT perspective which I believe the majority of MBTIers would see the distinction behind. And from there, if these 8 types are agreed on and taken as a "staple" or "standard" starting point, it will force use to put any other typings one decides to make within the context of these eight.
Ne-lead : Jim Carry (NeTi)
Now I know some places online list him as ENTJ. But this not, from my understanding, what the majority of the typology community considers him, especially not those with knowledge of what Ne is, outside of the letter-code. Jim Carrey is very very Ne heavy. He has a constant thirst for stimulation, amusement, silliness, and displays thousands of self-parodies, imitations, and utilizes his divergent thought rhythm both in his acting and outside of acting. He has a restless energy and bubbling excitement. His eyes are continually wandering and seeking amusing ideas. He's well known for his hilarious movies such as Ace Ventura and The Mask, as well as Dumb and Dumber. In his case, his movies are not irrelevant to his cognition. It's not just that he appears Ne because he's cast in a lot of ditzy, silly, comical movies. He's cast in a lot of comic movies because he's Ne-lead and that's the appeal in him that gets him those roles. Fellow actors describe him, in the movie-making process, as being just as goofy and innovative.
The quintessential example of this is when Jim Carrey also experimented with "A Christmas Carol" where he played 8 characters simultaneously in the films. The ability for Jim Carrey to parody is a great part of his reputation. An Ne-parody is when Ne generates an abstraction in the form of an alternate scenario to the present topic (often several alternatives) and enacts the scenario in realtime, then slips back to their normal role, before slipping back into another one. In this way, high Ne users may appear like they're continually imitating things/idioms/scenes. Jim Carrey also displays this in his hundreds of facial expressions. He's known for making all manner of faces and he generally uses his face as yet another toy for his Ne to play with.
Fi-Lead : Michael Jackson (FiSe)
Interview w/ Oprah
Michael Jackson is one clear example of an Fi-lead type, and one which is rightly typed FiSe/ISFP in MBTI, so I'll be using him for Fi. Despite his performances in front of tens of thousands of people, and decades in the spotlight of the public, he naturally was subjective/introverted - which is itself a testament to how irrelevant said things are to subjectivity vs objectivity. However, a very noteworthy thing about MJ, which became apparent when people spoke to him in person, was that he had an unexpected and "bizarre" demeanor. They often called him names, "weirdo", "traumatized child", accused him of being gay (in a derogatory way), and accused him of a plethora of other things -- much moreso than your average celebrity.
But that so-called "bizarre", effeminate and childlike disposition he had was due to his heavy seelie Fi, which is a process that elicits inner feeling without a filter that displays only the emotions acceptable in the social context. He had an airy/breathy voice, and a face that continually looked pained. He didn't play the celebrity act. He spoke honestly about his past because he was asked to. More than many other humans he was simply himself without shame and he let other people react the way they wanted to, and misconstrue his words as they do. In this sense he revealed more about society, than society revealed about him (imo). There's much more about him, but I'll halt there.
Fe-Lead : Oprah Winfrey (FeNi)
Oprah was a talk-show host for 25 years, transforming what started as a profession akin to news-spokesmen into her daily emotional-help workshop. Each show that followed became a pipeline of emotional help and comfort for thousands of mothers, daughters and even husbands across the US. She thrived off of the exerting, asking for, pulling out, and sharing of people's and her own emotional energy. She is a sort of Fe that has a thirst for emotional saturation. She would often ask personal questions, always seeking to lead a session deeper into the other's emotional territory and setting herself as the confidant - and it worked. She managed to make many celebrities cry and many people to admit things publicly which were very private.
Affirmation, trust, collective harmony and self-honesty were continual themes in her work. She became a counselor, a judge, a friend, a matriarch and a very loved individual by many. It's not that only Fe can do this, but Fe does do this, and the way she did it and for so long shows her Fe's imprint very clearly.
Ti-Lead : Tony Hawk (TiSe)
Tony Hawk is considered ISTP in MBTI, for reasons not unrelated to his specialization in a technical and tactile sport. This sport is filled with many other types as well. But in his case, it is indeed Ti which he uses to calibrate and refine his technique.
There aren't many examples of Ti-leads which CT and MBTI can agree on. I use Tony Hawk and not Einstein, Bill Gates, Darwin, or other mbti-considered Ti-leads because neither of those are Ti-leads. Ti is a process not well understood in mbti. The attributes of Te are generally those attributed to Ti (like objectivity, scientific, good at physics, math, empirical). Ti is instead, subjective, philosophical, seeking conceptual perfection, symmetry, excelling in dispassionate analysis of social dynamics and human protocols. And what they call Te is no function whatsoever (busywork, business, economy) but an assortment of shallow stereotypes.
Ni-Lead : Ray Kurzweil
Again as with Ti, Ni leads are lacking in the accuracy of MBTI so I find it hard to find an example that both CT and MBTI agree upon. Many supposed NiTe such as Isaac Newton and Ayn Rand are TeNi (falsely identified due to the false pretense of E vs I, when in fact being judgment-lead inclines one more toward axiomatic thought, which is what's most suited to the axioms/principles layed out by people like Ayn Rand). Instead, Ni-leads, being Pi-leads are more disposed to percieve a specific terrain to the world and direct their Je to navigating and altering that actual terrain.
There is more "context" that is considered, in Ni-Leads, while TeNi take more into consideration the principle. This is why Ray Kurzweil (probably NiTe, but NiFe not impossible) is more keen on foretelling the actual coming trends and causalities in the context of the world to arrive. This is the same reason NiFe Steve Jobs was able to predict and tailor to the rising needs and evolving tastes of the population and successfully market Mac. There is a bit of reference in the MBTI to "prophetic" power attributed to Ni, and this isn't precisely right. The insight of Ni is not a gut feeling, it is not something that arises from the unconscious. It is moreso a heightened awareness of the inevitability of causality. It is like seeing a person tripping in mid-fall and knowing they'll faceplant in .25 seconds. That "sense" of the inevitability occurs for Ni-leads in little bursts specific to each context, each time Ni reacts and reflects/recalls, but the span across which that sense expands may be much broader than for other types.
Se-Lead : Chris Tucker (SeTi)
Chris Tucker, like Jim Carrey, is stimulated and driven by intake of immediate experience and information. He is alert, quick to move and notice change, and has a natural excitement. The difference is that Tucker's stimulation relies on the quality of the world and the stronger the qualities, the more excited he becomes. His attention and what he highlights/speaks about also reflect this calling toward qualities.
Chris Tucker represents the stereotypical SeTi embodiment, off-stage but also best depicted in films like Rush Hour. Present-oriented, talkative, craving the next available sensory rush - which makes him a good comparison point for CT and MBTI. Unlike some mbti types which have near to no correlation to cognitive types, there's a percentage of SeTi that do indeed fit the profile of ESTP, of which Tucker is one, but that isn't all an SeTi can be or look like. Studying his mannerisms, demeanor and more profound thoughts gives insight into other SeTi.
Te-Lead : [PENDING]
Si-Lead : [PENDING]
(to be continued)