A 'Better' MBTI Model?

[jason_m]

Let's look at the MBTI model:

1. Extraversion vs. Introversion
- This means social introversion and social extraversion. Jung's model refers more to processes turning toward objects or away from them.

2. Thinking vs. Feeling
- This means more tough-minded and logical vs. more tender-minded and sentimental in the MBTI. Jung refers to thinking as 'conscious (or 'voluntary') reasoning' as opposed to emotional/sentimental reasoning.

3. Intuition vs. Sensation
- This means a focus on the big-picture vs. finer details in the MBTI. Jung's notion actually refers to sub-conscious reasoning vs. a focus on the actual senses.

4. Judging vs. Perceiving
- This refers to whether one is more organized or less structured. Jung's notion is more subtle and simply has to do with which function is in the leading position.

Now, let's look at what the MBTI functions mean:

1. Se: Sensation-seeking, fun-loving person.
2. Ne: project-oriented person, who can change paths in a heartbeat.
3. Si: detail-oriented person.
4. Ni: single-minded, long-range project-oriented person or visionary.
5. Ti: aloof, abstract intellectual.
6. Fe: warm, people-oriented person.
7. Fi: sensitive person on the inside.
8. Te: tough-minded, administrative, managerial-esque person.

Now, let's 'clean up' the MBTI model:

Judging type means that you value structure. (Perceiving the opposite.)

Introverted still means socially introverted. (Extraversion still the opposite.)

Thinking and feeling now simply refer to whether one is tough-minded/disagreeable or sensitive/agreeable.

Sensing vs. Intuition now means in touch with the senses or in touch with the minds-eye.

Therefore, if one is 'INTJ', they have:

1. Ni (Leading function)
2. Te
3. Fi
4. Se (Inferior function)

However the model is different because:
- the 'introverted' functions now mean not used as much socially or used more on the inside because introversion/extraversion is a social phenomenon.
- the 'extraverted' functions now mean used a lot socially and less on the inside for the same reason as above.
- the judging types now use sensing/intuition in a structured way, because they test as having more structure.
- perceiving types now extravert either sensing or intuition in an unstructured way, because they do not have judging as a function.

Then we have the following functions:

1. Se: concrete random operator: seeks out sensations in an unstructured way(if ES_P, then likely in an extraverted, social way).
2. Ne: abstract random operator: jumps from big project to big project (or idea to idea) in an unstructured way (if EN_P, then likely in an extraverted, social way).
3. Ti: tough-minded on the inside, less socially.
4. Te: tough-minded on the outside, less on the inside.
5. Fi: warm and feeling on the inside, less socially.
6. Fe: warm and feeling on the outside, less on the inside.
7. Si: concrete sequential operator: works with concrete ideas in a structured fashion (if IS_J, then likely more on the inside).
8. Ni: abstract sequential thinker: full of abstract ideas on in a structured fashion (if IN_J, then likely more on the inside).

EDIT: note:
- 'Se' is is no longer called 'extraverted sensation', but 'concrete random'
- 'Ni': 'abstract random'
- etc.

You can then combine the functions as the theory says. 'INTJ' would be:

1. structured abstract thinker - mainly on the inside. (Ni)
2. tough-minded on the outside. (Te)
3. Warm and feeling on the inside. (Fi)
4. Sensation-seeking on the outside. (Se)

'ENTP' would be:

1. Unstructured abstract thinker, especially on the outside. (Ne)
2. Tough-mined on the inside. (Ti)
3. A little bit personable socially. (Fe)
4. Not in touch with concrete, structured processing. (Si)

My theory is that this is closer to what the MBTI is actually measuring...

I should also make this clear:

1. My interpretation is not, by any means, a 'theory of everything' - the way the MBTI is sometimes interpreted. There are many psychological qualities that would escape my theory.
2. A lot of the names are just coincidental; 'thinking' does not necessarily mean 'mentation.'
3. A lot of the functions and some of the dichotomies are not the same as the MBTI - or Carl Jung's theory.
4. This is merely an attempt at making the MBTI test more accurate at what it measures.

I want everyone to keep this in consideration when evaluating my theory...