Type personability and motive theory

[Jo Lande]

Hello. I wanted to make this topic to speculate over how types appear and aspects that affect their personality. Some of it might be obvious, though I hope maybe some of it could be helpful. Feel free to provide your input.

Disclaimer: I am just spitballing, so I apologize if these concepts already exist or they are totally wrong.

Part 1: Personability
Part 2: Motive
Part 3: Putting it all together

Part 1: Personability

A common sentiment on many forums is that some types are more introverted or extroverted than others. E.g. LIE vs ESE. Now, I don’t think it necessarily equates to some types being ambiverted, but more towards where they direct this energy, which leads to this theory.

Ti, Te, Ni, Ne: These functions are mostly used in the case of objects, abstract concepts and organization. In other words, they often put little focus on people. In that sense, you could consider these business or impersonal functions.

Fi, Fe, Si, Se: These functions are mostly used in the case of people, developing relationships or making people feel a certain way. They wouldn’t normally be used in a strictly business sense, in other words, while working in an office alone. You could call these home or personal functions.

Depending on what is the leading function, the types could have a stronger preference for personal or impersonal interactions. E.g. Ti-Se will have stronger impersonal tendencies whereas Fi-Ne will have stronger personal tendencies.

This theory could be considered an extension or alternative take on the clubs.

NTx: Impersonal.

STj, NFp: Impersonal-Leaning.

NFj, STp: Personal-Leaning.

SFx: Personal.

When we put it this way, it could show why some types are more closed off than others. A LII will almost always be more closed off than a SEI or how IEEs go through introverted stints vs SEEs for example. Of course, other factors play a role like the health of the individual.

Going along with this, it makes me wonder about the correlation of the Base and Role functions. By the above logic, each type has the capacity to display a personal or impersonal function in the right situation.

For example, a LII and EII while among acquaintances engaging in small talk will most likely use Fi whereas they will use Ti while working alone. I think Gulenko already went over this with his model, but this might be the reason why the Role function can be as or more prominent than the Base depending on the situation.

With this same knowledge, it might explain how duals interact with or ignore each other. Let’s take two scenarios.

1. A LII man approaches an ESE woman at a party. Being in a place of discomfort, he engages his role Fi and tries to act polite, to which the ESE finds stiff and boring. She ignores him and moves on.
2. A LII man sits at his computer, going over documents. An ESE woman notices him and looks over his shoulder, asking what he’s busy with. He explains, drawing her interest, beginning the Ti-Fe transference.

These are from real world scenarios that I have observed, and I think might play a key role in drawing a dual. The best way to utilize your Base function is where it is at its strongest and that will attract your dual, or those who value your function at least. Point is, the old adage of being yourself is relevant here.

Part 2: Motive

One dynamic that has always perplexed me is the difference between Quasi-identicals. How they can seem so similar, but still be opposite on the whole. For example, an ESE typically focuses on the enjoyment of the group whereas a SEE focuses on the attention gained from the group. Of course, these are stereotypes, but they do have some basis from what I have witnessed. Now, why would this happen?

Once again, I think it lies in the functions.

Fe, Si, Te, Ni: These functions are normally utilized to improve people’s well-being for the first two or the quality of a business for the latter. These could be considered collective functions since they aim for the improvement of the atmosphere or structure to ensure levity or productivity within a group situation.

Fi, Se, Ti, Ne: These functions are normally utilized to exert a strong, opinionated stance with the first two, or the satisfaction of a system with every angle covered for the latter. These could be considered individualistic functions since they serve to refine inner values or systems and enforce will or explore originality.

Using this logic, we could categorize the temperaments into these fields.

IJ and EP: The Individualists.

IP and EJ: The Collectivists.

This could once again help in the explanation of duality. The LII’s strong systems and inward thinking is attractive to the ESE who doesn’t spend much time on self-reflection, whereas the LII finds the ESE’s ability to comfort others attractive. The ILI loves the SEE's confidence and strong values while the SEE loves the ILI’s ability to predict the best solution to any problem, especially in the workplace.

Part 3: Putting it all together

Now we can begin grouping them based on these two concepts.

Alphas:

LII: Introverted Impersonal Individualist.

ILE: Extroverted Impersonal Individualist.

ESE: Extroverted Personal Collectivist.

SEI: Introverted Personal Collectivist.

Betas:

LSI: Introverted Impersonal-Leaning Individualist.

SLE: Extroverted Personal-Leaning Individualist.

EIE: Extroverted Personal-Leaning Collectivist.

IEI: Introverted Impersonal-Leaning Collectivist.

Gamma:

ILI: Introverted Impersonal Collectivist.

LIE: Extroverted Impersonal Collectivist.

SEE: Extroverted Personal Individualist.

ESI: Introverted Personal Individualist.

Delta:

SLI: Introverted Personal-Leaning Collectivist.

LSE: Extroverted Impersonal-Leaning Collectivist.

IEE: Extroverted Impersonal-Leaning Individualist.

EII: Introverted Personal-Leaning Individualist.

There are some interesting correlations with type interactions based on these categories, though I will stop here since I’ve already gone on for too long.

Thank you for reading.

[Sol]

Type is what dominates in a consciousness. When you think much about something - it becomes important motivation.