Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: A 9th function?

  1. #1
    akjohnny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    98
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Question A 9th function?

    I realize this is purely hypothetical, but I'm curious if you think that the 8 current functions of the MBTI and socionics together and separate encompass all of the human functions. Obviously the personality functions don't explain or cover the vast entirety of the human experience, but do you think there are more SPECIFIC personality functions that are not categorized and explained?

    I ask this because I've considered that the current systems do seem to cover a pretty wide range of people's functions and have obviously attempted to cover the wide gamut of emotions, experiences and information gathering processes people display; but perhaps there could be an addition 2 perceiving functions or judgement functions. Your thoughts?


    Arguments and putdowns need not apply.

  2. #2
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,907
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by akjohnny View Post
    I realize this is purely hypothetical, but I'm curious if you think that the 8 current functions of the MBTI and socionics together and separate encompass all of the human functions. Obviously the personality functions don't explain or cover the vast entirety of the human experience, but do you think there are more SPECIFIC personality functions that are not categorized and explained?

    I ask this because I've considered that the current systems do seem to cover a pretty wide range of people's functions and have obviously attempted to cover the wide gamut of emotions, experiences and information gathering processes people display; but perhaps there could be an addition 2 perceiving functions or judgement functions. Your thoughts?


    Arguments and putdowns need not apply.
    9 is for Enneagram, and 16 is for plus/minus functions.

    I still got a lot of digging to do on both of them, and my links may not be the best places in the world to start, but if you're looking for something fresh to dig into, there you go. I don't wanna put too much pressure on anyone here, but there's a few members who use a vast amount of different systems across the board and overlay them on top of each other. @Ath has some really intriguing stuff so far from what I've seen.

    Anyways, tethering Process/Result to the IEs at an elemental level as with Model B is really cool as far as getting into the "how" of things; for example, Ti from LIIs would be different from Ti from LSIs. Also, somewhere at the Enneagram boards, members supposed at least one extra instinct, one of them being the "death drive" if I recall right, shortened to "su", but these themes of the undertow/decay side of death (as opposed to a transformational/rebirth/phoenix-rising-from-the-ashes thing) are already covered by the sp/sx portion of the contra-flow stackings.

    Anyways, that which doesn't fall within the parameters of Rationality will strictly be Irrationality, and vice-versa. Inside the former, that which isn't Logical Rationality will be Ethical Rationality; inside the latter, that which isn't Sensory Irrationality will be Intuitive Rationality. And so on, and so forth. Such is the way of the dichotomy. Verbal descriptions of anything will be limited by the constraints of time and language.

  3. #3
    akjohnny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    98
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by woofwoofl View Post
    9 is for Enneagram, and 16 is for plus/minus functions.

    I still got a lot of digging to do on both of them, and my links may not be the best places in the world to start, but if you're looking for something fresh to dig into, there you go. I don't wanna put too much pressure on anyone here, but there's a few members who use a vast amount of different systems across the board and overlay them on top of each other. @Ath has some really intriguing stuff so far from what I've seen.

    Anyways, tethering Process/Result to the IEs at an elemental level as with Model B is really cool as far as getting into the "how" of things; for example, Ti from LIIs would be different from Ti from LSIs. Also, somewhere at the Enneagram boards, members supposed at least one extra instinct, one of them being the "death drive" if I recall right, shortened to "su", but these themes of the undertow/decay side of death (as opposed to a transformational/rebirth/phoenix-rising-from-the-ashes thing) are already covered by the sp/sx portion of the contra-flow stackings.

    Anyways, that which doesn't fall within the parameters of Rationality will strictly be Irrationality, and vice-versa. Inside the former, that which isn't Logical Rationality will be Ethical Rationality; inside the latter, that which isn't Sensory Irrationality will be Intuitive Rationality. And so on, and so forth. Such is the way of the dichotomy. Verbal descriptions of anything will be limited by the constraints of time and language.
    Hm interesting thanks i haven't got into the +/- thing because for me the validation was that there were 2 systems (MBTI/socionics) that had similar function uses. The two together seemed to me to give it some sort of more authority than if either one goes off on its own. anyway, i have been trying to form an overall (?) view of personalities in general, going from biggest to smallest and your input about it being divided into irrational and rational makes a lot of sense. I suppose i think if you start with learning all the details first you could end up wasting time if the big overarching foundations are wrong or skewed.

    I suppose the introverted intuition was what got me thinking about this with some claiming that things just "pop" into existence in their mind (answers to questions or ponderings) which just seemed to me like the original theorists just wanted to come up with a way to explain how people could know or learn things without having a source - kind of like "we don't know how this shit happens so lets just call it and say it pops into existence in their mind." Not saying I doubt , but thats just how i see it since i don't understand it.

  4. #4
    ഗന᎕ᒹ ±ᗉᚔXᙂഗ woofwoofl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Southern Arizona
    TIM
    x s x p s p s x
    Posts
    1,907
    Mentioned
    227 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default send in the IEIs, ILIs; any Ni peepz...

    Quote Originally Posted by akjohnny View Post
    Hm interesting thanks i haven't got into the +/- thing because for me the validation was that there were 2 systems (MBTI/socionics) that had similar function uses. The two together seemed to me to give it some sort of more authority than if either one goes off on its own. anyway, i have been trying to form an overall (?) view of personalities in general, going from biggest to smallest and your input about it being divided into irrational and rational makes a lot of sense. I suppose i think if you start with learning all the details first you could end up wasting time if the big overarching foundations are wrong or skewed.

    I suppose the introverted intuition was what got me thinking about this with some claiming that things just "pop" into existence in their mind (answers to questions or ponderings) which just seemed to me like the original theorists just wanted to come up with a way to explain how people could know or learn things without having a source - kind of like "we don't know how this shit happens so lets just call it and say it pops into existence in their mind." Not saying I doubt , but thats just how i see it since i don't understand it.
    Thankss and the stuff is hard for me to get a first-hand feel for on an elemental level too. The intuitive take on field dynamics that constitutes Ni would have a more tangible counterpart in Si, and I'm gonna mine the chatbox archives for something I posted on Si:

    woofwoofl Yesterday 01:25 PM yes, probably and strength in one [Se] will mean strength in the other [Si]; from what I know of Si, there's this sense of equilibrium and balance to it as well, that certain days and songs will end up having these intense physical and just slightly out of reach characteristics to them, and then I can find when they align, like feeling the weather outside and seeing how it looks like when the earth is awakening from winter makes me want to play certain guitar chords

    woofwoofl Yesterday 01:25 PM chords that I would have never played in the winter, because it wouldn't make sense, I'd have no need to communicate any of those things because the world isn't telling me what it's telling me right now, so it just wouldn't feel right

    woofwoofl Yesterday 01:34 PM I know exactly what you mean there, as in, you got hit with something that is absolutely different from the winter that preceeded it, the smell of the earth, the way the air is warmer and now wetter, how it meshes better with my skin, feeling the wind blow through my clothes and hair, about how there's an identity to everything that was previously hidden due to the winter itself?


    In absence of the type of externalized container, as in, object, that an Se-oriented take on anything Sensory would require, the "Sensing" gets to run free and encompass all, without any semblance of compartmentalization. The best I can do from there is to think of an intangible take on such a thing...

Posting Permissions

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