Cultural archetypes, stereotypes and modal types

[edcoaching]

Originally Posted by Jack Flak

I've taken both types of Socionics test, and always came out INTp, so they apparently work for me (this type has been confirmed by relationship analysis on my part). It's common for INFJ to equal socionics INFp.

It seemed the equivalent to me...

Personally, I think functional analysis is completely unnecessary, even though it may have merit. Primary functions are generally fairly obvious if you pick one definition of a function, and one way to split the populace into eight categories a la Jung--But they aren't as apparent/observable as ones type anyway. I see all functions but the first as potentially out of order, and when people contemplate them they base their conclusions on what their preconceived notions of function order are. I have been guilty of this myself, of course.

I think Keirsey's beautifully behavior-oriented.

Ah...my least favorite application of type is typing from afar...I want people to figure out their own types. Doesn't mean I never do but I'm not looking for a system. And I usually have to work with someone before I know for sure. By that time they've usually figured it out themselves...

And Kiersey--I kinda threw him away after his Please Understand Me remark, "The relative rarity of the ESTP's opposite on the Intuitive side, INFJ, means that shuch matings will be quite infrequent, as they should be." I"ve been married to an ESTP for decades, thank you, and it's been a whole lot of fun. Didn't like the stereotyping.

[Jack Flak]

I've said before that Keirsey's relationship conclusions don't seem to be based on a great deal of study.

There's no perfect system; that's why I pick and choose what works.

[edcoaching]

Originally Posted by Jack Flak

I've said before that Keirsey's relationship conclusions don't seem to be based on a great deal of study.

Nor his instrument--he only last spring released any validity studies...

There's no perfect system; that's why I pick and choose what works.

In that, we are in total agreement.

[Jeffster]

Originally Posted by edcoaching

It can also be very useful. Say you want to win a presidential campaign. Knowing the culture has, say, an archetype around Extraversion and Sensing can help you plan your campaign--especially if you know the modal type is also ES. Here's what you'd do:[list]...

Yeah, but that's about figuring out the personalities of a lot of individuals that make up the whole. Some people around here were actually trying to personify a country, as if we were this big monolith with one brain. It's a big difference.

[Falcarius]

Originally Posted by booyalab

Yeah, boo hoo. It must have really sucked for Europe when we saved its butt and forgave every debt.

Bullshit, you been watching far too many Hollywood films.

Also, you seem to be forgetting a country which the US "never forgave every debit" and of which she made them pay back the full amount.

[sarah]

Originally Posted by edcoaching

It seemed the equivalent to me...



Ah...my least favorite application of type is typing from afar...I want people to figure out their own types. Doesn't mean I never do but I'm not looking for a system. And I usually have to work with someone before I know for sure. By that time they've usually figured it out themselves...

And Kiersey--I kinda threw him away after his Please Understand Me remark, "The relative rarity of the ESTP's opposite on the Intuitive side, INFJ, means that shuch matings will be quite infrequent, as they should be." I"ve been married to an ESTP for decades, thank you, and it's been a whole lot of fun. Didn't like the stereotyping.

Keirsey's Please Undestand Me is pretty difficult to find any practical use for unless you disregard all his examples of behavior and just focus on the patterns themselves. I'd feel insulted by his steroetyping no matter what type I thought was mine. None of his portraits of temperament fit anyone I know.

I know Keirsey qualifies his statements (most of the time) with words like "might" and "could", but they still irriatate me. I only found the book helpful in that he outlines four patterns of preferences on his charts comparing the temperaments, and after a LOOOOONG Time of considering my habitual behavior and trying to separate how I really think/feel with what I have grown up to value thanks to parents, friends, etc, I finally realized I fit one of those patterns.

Too bad Keirsey couldn't resist throwing in a whole lot of stereotypical behavior traits in those type/temperament descriptions. It just makes people like me who prefer Sensing and who care about details and accuracy not able to see our best fit pattern very easily.

Sarah
ISFP