Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Why is there this belief that Ps are open to change and Js are structured?

  1. #1
    The Troll Slayer Hitta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    In your mom's uterus
    Posts
    4,009
    Mentioned
    154 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default Why is there this belief that Ps are open to change and Js are structured?

    I really don't understand why people think this. J and P is function sets. J is T/F P is N/S. Just think about it, that P and Js are like that is to say that mirror types are different.
    Model X Will Save Us!

    *randomwarelinkremoved

    jessica129:scrotums r hot

    :" hitting cap makes me envision cervix smashing"

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    there is no such belief.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17 View Post
    there is no such belief.
    Well, actually, there is such a belief, but it's not phrased exactly as hitta put it. There's an introductory article by Dmitri that relates to the "rational" types to the psychological concept of "lability." Ganin's site has or had definitions posted on it that could also lead one to the same conclusion. Rick's has a page as well defining characteristics of rational and irrational types, although it's a bit more nuanced.

    This was a big topic awhile ago, maybe the biggest topic on the forum once, before people got really tired of it. The reality of the situation is that in Socionics, there are a number of different factors that may influence whether some is seen as "flexible" or "rigid," and irrationality/rationality is just one of them.

    Of course, hitta's phrasing..."open to change"...may be confusing here, because the big question is, what kind of change are we talking about?

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,578
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    as hitta phrased it, there is no such belief. end of story.

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hitta View Post
    I really don't understand why people think this. J and P is function sets. J is T/F P is N/S. Just think about it, that P and Js are like that is to say that mirror types are different.
    From MBTI characterizations that somehow end up spilling over into the realm of socionics.
    Classical socionics: (), ILI-Ni
    Dual-type theory: INTp-ENTp

    5w6 sp/sx
    MBTI: INTJ

  6. #6
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    well, it's not as if the temperaments are bullshit. There is some general correlation, but I agree, there are other specific things related to function usage/order, etc. that contribute to someone being structured, etc. however, structured, organized are not good words because they are just behavioral traits, which can be learned. to me, it is about a state of mind, a frame of reference.

    hitta, are you going to start proposing various types being more open than others based on your +/- theory?

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,969
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by strrrng View Post
    hitta, are you going to start proposing various types being more open than others based on your +/- theory?
    He already did. He proposed awhile back a dichotomy equivalent to merry (subjectivist) vs. serious (objectivist). If I understood correctly, he thought the merry/subjectivist quadras (Alpha and Beta) were the ones open to change.

  8. #8
    The Iniquitous inumbra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    954
    Posts
    5,989
    Mentioned
    70 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You (Hitta) said in your recent 'why the ILIs here aren't ILIs' topic that liking routines and not liking change was a defining characteristic of what it means to be ILI. I simply said that can't be so, because it doesn't work with an irrational type. That doesn't mean that all people of an irrational type are open to change and avoid structures. For one, I don't think you can define *any* type on it liking routines and not liking change, but to make that a defining quality of an irrational type seems even more absurd than if you were to attach that quality to a rational type (like LII or LSI). The problem is, the things you say, can often be applied to anyone... because it's so general that many meanings can be interpretted from it... it just turns into a lot of meaningless mush in some ways... I don't know.

    In general I suppose I do think of irrationality as involving a changeable inner state moreso than rationality... And I could be wrong about this. I mean, to make matters worse, my own understanding is amorphous.

  9. #9
    strrrng's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    Ni-IEI 4w3 sx/so
    Posts
    8,781
    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki
    In general I suppose I do think of irrationality as involving a changeable inner state moreso than rationality... And I could be wrong about this. I mean, to make matters worse, my own understanding is amorphous.
    you're not wrong. irrationality is a free-flowing state of mind, so to speak. It is about reaction, not control. rationality is more rigid in the sense that it strives for control and/or rules, to some degree.

    rick has a very good, short article on this at his blog.

  10. #10
    ...been here longer than the fucking monarchy Ezra's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    UK
    TIM
    SLE-Ti
    Posts
    9,167
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The reason is that people are fundamentally influenced by MBTT.
    Ideas don't determine who's right. Power determines who's right. And I have the power. So I'm right.

  11. #11
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ezra View Post
    The reason is that people are fundamentally influenced by MBTT.
    That was my first reaction to this question also.
    IEI-Fe 4w3

  12. #12
    Ti centric krieger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,983
    Mentioned
    80 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Tempted to conjecture that it might actually work the expected way under dual-type theory; the thing obfuscating matters being that most people live with a combination of judging and perceiving in their psyches...

    Would tcaudilllg describe himself as a 'structured' person?

  13. #13
    redbaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    9,321
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by labcoat View Post
    Tempted to conjecture that it might actually work the expected way under dual-type theory; the thing obfuscating matters being that most people live with a combination of judging and perceiving in their psyches...

    Would tcaudilllg describe himself as a 'structured' person?
    Or you. Would you describe yourself as structured?
    IEI-Fe 4w3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •