Introversion and extraversion is too abstract to measure on an individual person, because like you say, other factors, like feeling, thinking, intuition and sensing tend to muddle them up, and introverted and feeling types may not relate to introverted and thinking aspects. But then there's also the problem with how static the term introvert or extravert is. Introversion should be referred to as a desire to use the inner world to understand the outer and Extraversion as wanting to use the outer world to understand the inner. Today, it's something static. An introvert lives only in the inner world, the extravert only in the outer world. In reality, an extravert is constantly using the inner world to cross check against the outer, while the introvert is using the outer world to cross check against the inner world, but an introvert will generally give priority to the inner over the outer. To me, introverts look to their personal values or reasons or what they would like the world to look like, and then they see if they can use that to explain their surroundings and what is happening around them. Extraverts look at what other people say and do and tell them, and then they think about if that matches up to their values and what they think is right and wrong. And with this, we get rid of the superstereotype that extraverts base their values on what everyone else thinks or likes and that introverts only listen to or care about themselves.
An introvert gets their "stimulation" internally, and an extrovert gets their stimulation externally. Introversion and Extroversion refers to the primary mode of stimulation a person exzbits in the way they process information. From the internal or the external. It's about stimulus leading to information processing. Internally or Externally. This is the true meaning of Introvert and Extrovert. Bruce B.
@Faraz shahzad Well, it may manifest in different ways. For instance I write with my right hand, but on a skateboard I stand with my right foot forward. This is called "goofy footed". It should be the other way around. Ambiverts don't really "do", necessarily , anything. It's like ambidextrous people somewhat. They write with both hands. Ambiverts have 1 foot in the extrovert world and 1 in the introvert world. It is a right brain left brain equality of sorts. Instead of leaning 1 way or the other. Stuck in the middle. The man or woman in the hallway so to speak. Always making decisions about decisions about decisions about decisions about decisions etc.............
MM Ne/Fi CS/P(B) here, and I’m one of the most “introverted extroverts” I know, hahaha. I always fell right in the middle of introvert/extrovert spectrums and identified as an ambivert, but learning about OP made myself easier to understand!
Just want to make a point that I personally really appreciate the new videos you are putting out. It's straight to the point, no BS, engaging, and something I can share with my friends who aren't as familiar about cognitive functions than I am. Keep up the great work as this is very valuable, at least from my point of view.
I've tried too see all of reality and became depressed. A dangerous painful place to be in. Thought about death a lot. It's amazing how we can matter so much or so little at times.
I like your point on limited perspectives, both in that we can be blind to realities others see, or we can see them but just don’t care and view them as irrelevant. This explains a lot about my INTJ sister and me (ENTP).
I'm Fi/Se/Ni/Te and I'm a musician play guitar and will talk to people I'm comfortable but I need alot of solitude. I get called an E type because I perform no that's not how it works. I'm ISFP an artisan
"SI ignoring all the physical things around them": my husband left his phone on the passenger seat of my car and he had to chase me for nearly 20km before I noticed (the phone first, him by deduction) all the while being really mad at the moron that had been honkin at me, waving his arm from his window for a good 15 minutes
There are some good corrective points to folk typology in the video. And the thing about different conscious orientations, adapted to prevent chaos in the life form, is also what Jung was getting at, at least at one point. I would add that extroversion/introversion on the trait level is a very evident trait, in fact _the_ most evident psychometric trait, which is why a lot of observations from trait theory tend to creep into typology. And it's not completely clear how much one should include from that domain in modern renditions of typology. For our part, we solve that problem by separating trait theory completely from cognitive orientation, which can be awkward at times (Bill Gates as an E type), but tends to create less messiness than mixing trait extroversion with cognitive extroversion. And on that note, I can think of one website that doesn't copy paste truisms from other sites, but uses the historical psychodynamic definition of E/I. ;)
I have found Myers-Briggs to be helpful. It may not have all the answers, but finding out my personality type was helpful to me. I knew ahead of time that I was an introvert, even though I do have some extroverted tendencies that I have built up over the past 50 + years. I don't know if there's anyone measuring device that has all of the answers, but I do my best to be sure that I own the classification and that the classification doesn't own me.
Most of my friends/family label me as an “extrovert” because I talk a lot, then I started getting to know someone who’s familiar with OPS and I was told I actually come off as an introverted decider lol
Hey just a note Dave you might want to swap "typing based on skills" with "behavioral observations" although "anecdote-land," admittedly packs a nice festive punch.
May not be the main point of the video, but I find it interesting that so many people are convinced that Jung never conceived of Extraverted vs Introverted "types" outside of the functions themselves (being either extraverted or introverted). Jung clearly spends a great deal of time describing the eight "special" types in his Psychological Types, but that is predicated on the introduction where he explicitly states there are "two basic types" that are "so different and present such a striking contrast that their existence becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out." And that introductory section is preceded by a lengthy discussion of the significant differences and distinctions between these two "types" (extraverts and introverts). This doesn't prove that Jung's theories are themselves accurate -- but that's a *separate* issue/concern. My point is that Jung himself clearly conceived of "extraverted" and "introverted" types of people, based on and distinguished by their respective attitudes to the object (of their experience). To whatever degree we/others have extended our understanding of Jung's theories and further developed the "eight-function" model to exclude extraversion/introversion as its own distinct dichotomy, that is our own doing -- it is not Jung's model of psychological type. As a sub-set of that primary (what he calls "basic") typological distinction, Jung then *does* describe in greater detail eight "special types" that have a (dominant) differentiated function as the basis for their individual "peculiarities" -- but he describes them as extraverted or introverted individuals who are predominantly oriented by one of the *four* functions, not as types of people who are defined by one of eight functions. I believe that we are reading Jung in hindsight, through a lens where the eight functions (Ti/Fi/Te/Fe...) are presupposed and presumably self-evident in his work -- thus re-writing (or at least reinterpreting) Jung's theory to fit the more modernized eight-function theories of Grant/Beebe/et al. Jung himself conceived of eight types of *people* who had a differentiated, dominant orientation -- but derived from only *four* functions. Whether or not Jung's theories themselves were accurate or can be proven is, again, a separate concern. But we shouldn't conflate the Jungian "types" with the eight-function model(s) seen most frequently promulgated in today's personality type discussions. /// Below are a few key excerpts from Psychological Types as referenced above... /// "In the following pages I shall attempt a general description of the psychology of the types, starting with the two basic types I have termed introverted and extraverted. This will be followed by a description of those more special types whose peculiarities are due to the fact that the individual adapts and orients himself chiefly by means of his most differentiated function. [...] "The attitude-types, as I have repeatedly emphasized in the preceding chapters, are distinguished by their attitude to the object. The introvert’s attitude is an abstracting one; at bottom, he is always intent on withdrawing libido from the object, as though he had to prevent the object from gaining power over him. The extravert, on the contrary, has a positive relation to the object. He affirms its importance to such an extent that his subjective attitude is constantly related to and oriented by the object. The object can never have enough value for him, and its importance must always be increased. The two types are so different and present such a striking contrast that their existence becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out. [...] “One man resigns himself to circumstances because experience has shown him that nothing else is possible, another is convinced that though things have gone the same way a thousand times before, the thousand and first time will be different. The one allows himself to be oriented by the given facts, the other holds in reserve a view which interposes itself between him and the objective data. Now, when orientation by the object predominates in such a way that decisions and actions are determined not by subjective views but by objective conditions, we speak of an extraverted attitude. When this is habitual, we speak of an extraverted type. If a man thinks, feels, acts, and actually lives in a way that is directly correlated with the objective conditions and their demands, he is extraverted."
It would be better to just use internal/external or internist/externist instead. Introversion/Extroversion are used in everyday language to describe someone's sociability which has nothing to do with how the cognitive functions are set up. This also why so many are mistyped.
An introvert gets their "stimulation" internally, and an extrovert gets their stimulation externally. Introversion and Extroversion refers to the primary mode of stimulation a person exzbits in the way they process information. From the internal or the external. It's about stimulus leading to information processing. Internally or Externally. This is the true meaning of Introvert and Extrovert. Bruce B.
I really need to show this to my daughter she got ahold of a free test and now thinks she can't function in certain areas! But there is to much cursing in your videos to expose my tween too! Please, please,, please,, clean it up and make it for public consumption to fight all the bad info out there!
This video is on point. Sometimes I wonder how accurate is to even include the term "Extroversion/Introversion" in typology when it isn't a real thing on itself
La caja de Pandora I just started to look into introversion and extroversion and I honestly was at a complete lost. For example It seemed crazy that people thought they were "always" draining energy (muddy thinking) when socializing. Even after I had to get them to admit they can enjoy and love socializing, they still continued to say, "it always drains me". Which I would respond, "in the moment to moment enjoyment of the socializing you're saying that you were being impacted negatively and you were being negatively drained?". Such sloppy word usage from people who go around saying introvert this introvert that or extrovert this or that etc. jeez.
@@triplec7713 Even if I'm having a lot of fun socializing it drains me. Drainging doesn't mean it's disgusting, just that it tires me. I have a lot of fun playing hockey but it tires me phisically; if I'm having a lot of fun I can push my body to keep going but that will also mean my body will get even more tired and I'll need more recovery time.
Yes i could never relate to either. Socialising has no impact on my energy. Physical activity is the only thing that has impact on my energy. If I'm doing a lot of things during the day, I'd be tired, if not I'd be restless. Talking and engaging with people has no impact on my energy.
If your lead function is extroverted, e.g., Te, Fe, Se, and Ne then you are extroverted. Likewise, if you lead with Ti, Ni, Fi, or Si then your introverted. Prove me wrong. You can’t.
SilentSputnik yeah the big 5 seems to be a little more practical and easier to understand than the functions/types. Although there isn’t much evidence that either one has any basis is science. At least not yet.
Because it's facaating and I think there is something to it. Just because it's not completely scientific doesn't mean it's meaning less. It's helped me understand my self better and I think it can help people.
Functions are fine, I don't buy into stacks though. Big 5 just measures statistical correlations, not what the types really are. And letters fuck up T/F and especially S/N. I do prefer it when it comes to E/I though. I'm tired of people who spend time alone saying "I'm actually an extravert because I'm externally focused"
You got your explanation of introversion and extroversion wrong. The question is, what energizes you, and what saps your energy, in your daily life? If I'm at a party, my energy level collapses fairly quickly. If I'm thinking about ideas, then I feel very energized. I don't mind being around people, but it becomes overwhelming in a short time. But if I'm working on an idea, I can work on it for hours without interruption.
and people don't understand that socializing can be an introverted activity. If socialising consists on discussing about some topics that energises me because even if i'm interacting with people I'm thinking a lot about ideas so the funtions I'm using the most are my dominant ones.
Meh, I dunno man, I still think there is such a thing as Introvert / Extrovert, without going into all that Function detail. Otherwise, why would you call someone an ISFP or an ESFP in the first place? Because one is more inclined to Introversion generally, while the other is more inclined to Extroversion generally. Yes, of course everyone "likes surprises" every now and then (It depends what the surprise is!). Of course everyone likes to have some alone time once in a while. Of course the Extrovert can use lots of "Ti" in their reasoning. But I still think you could appropriately label someone as Introverted or Extroverted (Surely? Maybe?). It doesn't matter which Introverted Function the Introvert has in the lead, or which Extroverted Function the Extrovert has in the lead. (And if one truly believes that they are "in between", then they're ambiverted. But then they'd have to call themselves XSFP rather than ISFP or ESFP, you get what I'm saying, bro??)
I think instead of saying you "have" or "use" 4 functions in a stack you better say that's how you "prefer" to view the world/make decisions etc. Considering you can "use" or at least mimic all 8 functions if necessary.
I agree , having a preferences or proclivity for certain functions is what really makes the types differ from eachother , not whether they simply use or have a function (although the fact that we have all the functions is well stipulated in davesuperpowers videos)
That's retarded. Te looks for logical reasons for things. Something as simple as asking "why?" means you're engaging in logic. You might wanna look up what "logic" or "logical" actually means before you use it in a sentence.
This is the best channel about personality stuff I ever found. THANK. YOU.
Me too
Same.
Introversion and extraversion is too abstract to measure on an individual person, because like you say, other factors, like feeling, thinking, intuition and sensing tend to muddle them up, and introverted and feeling types may not relate to introverted and thinking aspects. But then there's also the problem with how static the term introvert or extravert is.
Introversion should be referred to as a desire to use the inner world to understand the outer and Extraversion as wanting to use the outer world to understand the inner. Today, it's something static. An introvert lives only in the inner world, the extravert only in the outer world. In reality, an extravert is constantly using the inner world to cross check against the outer, while the introvert is using the outer world to cross check against the inner world, but an introvert will generally give priority to the inner over the outer.
To me, introverts look to their personal values or reasons or what they would like the world to look like, and then they see if they can use that to explain their surroundings and what is happening around them. Extraverts look at what other people say and do and tell them, and then they think about if that matches up to their values and what they think is right and wrong. And with this, we get rid of the superstereotype that extraverts base their values on what everyone else thinks or likes and that introverts only listen to or care about themselves.
An introvert gets their "stimulation" internally, and an extrovert gets their stimulation externally. Introversion and Extroversion refers to the primary mode of stimulation a person exzbits in the way they process information. From the internal or the external. It's about stimulus leading to information processing. Internally or Externally. This is the true meaning of Introvert and Extrovert. Bruce B.
@Faraz shahzad Well, it may manifest in different ways. For instance I write with my right hand, but on a skateboard I stand with my right foot forward. This is called "goofy footed". It should be the other way around. Ambiverts don't really "do", necessarily , anything. It's like ambidextrous people somewhat. They write with both hands. Ambiverts have 1 foot in the extrovert world and 1 in the introvert world. It is a right brain left brain equality of sorts. Instead of leaning 1 way or the other. Stuck in the middle. The man or woman in the hallway so to speak. Always making decisions about decisions about decisions about decisions about decisions etc.............
MM Ne/Fi CS/P(B) here, and I’m one of the most “introverted extroverts” I know, hahaha. I always fell right in the middle of introvert/extrovert spectrums and identified as an ambivert, but learning about OP made myself easier to understand!
Just want to make a point that I personally really appreciate the new videos you are putting out.
It's straight to the point, no BS, engaging, and something I can share with my friends who aren't as familiar about cognitive functions than I am. Keep up the great work as this is very valuable, at least from my point of view.
I've tried too see all of reality and became depressed. A dangerous painful place to be in. Thought about death a lot. It's amazing how we can matter so much or so little at times.
More consciousness is always the answer.
I like your point on limited perspectives, both in that we can be blind to realities others see, or we can see them but just don’t care and view them as irrelevant. This explains a lot about my INTJ sister and me (ENTP).
I'm Fi/Se/Ni/Te and I'm a musician play guitar and will talk to people I'm comfortable but I need alot of solitude. I get called an E type because I perform no that's not how it works. I'm ISFP an artisan
"SI ignoring all the physical things around them": my husband left his phone on the passenger seat of my car and he had to chase me for nearly 20km before I noticed (the phone first, him by deduction) all the while being really mad at the moron that had been honkin at me, waving his arm from his window for a good 15 minutes
You're great. I just thought about this during the day and turns out you put up a video. Keep it up!
Thank you for all the hard you guys have done :)
There are some good corrective points to folk typology in the video. And the thing about different conscious orientations, adapted to prevent chaos in the life form, is also what Jung was getting at, at least at one point.
I would add that extroversion/introversion on the trait level is a very evident trait, in fact _the_ most evident psychometric trait, which is why a lot of observations from trait theory tend to creep into typology. And it's not completely clear how much one should include from that domain in modern renditions of typology. For our part, we solve that problem by separating trait theory completely from cognitive orientation, which can be awkward at times (Bill Gates as an E type), but tends to create less messiness than mixing trait extroversion with cognitive extroversion.
And on that note, I can think of one website that doesn't copy paste truisms from other sites, but uses the historical psychodynamic definition of E/I. ;)
IDRlabs www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0005796770900690
Welcome back, Dave
I have found Myers-Briggs to be helpful. It may not have all the answers, but finding out my personality type was helpful to me. I knew ahead of time that I was an introvert, even though I do have some extroverted tendencies that I have built up over the past 50 + years. I don't know if there's anyone measuring device that has all of the answers, but I do my best to be sure that I own the classification and that the classification doesn't own me.
Most of my friends/family label me as an “extrovert” because I talk a lot, then I started getting to know someone who’s familiar with OPS and I was told I actually come off as an introverted decider lol
Social extroversion =/= cognitive extraversion, i have lead Te and im pretty reserved
Missnamed imo. The should be called internal and external, so that we don't confuse them with introversion and ekstroversion.
AGREED
Hey just a note Dave you might want to swap "typing based on skills" with "behavioral observations" although "anecdote-land," admittedly packs a nice festive punch.
*Extravert...lol
Another good video, getting tired of the stereotypes of both sides.
Extrovert is also correct
LittleLazyKitty Yes, just following Carl Jung's intention.
What about the whole "recharge" thing, seems quite true
This is awesome. Great explanation.
You're back! Awesome!
We want more, you can post long videos😋(guess my type)
May not be the main point of the video, but I find it interesting that so many people are convinced that Jung never conceived of Extraverted vs Introverted "types" outside of the functions themselves (being either extraverted or introverted).
Jung clearly spends a great deal of time describing the eight "special" types in his Psychological Types, but that is predicated on the introduction where he explicitly states there are "two basic types" that are "so different and present such a striking contrast that their existence becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out." And that introductory section is preceded by a lengthy discussion of the significant differences and distinctions between these two "types" (extraverts and introverts).
This doesn't prove that Jung's theories are themselves accurate -- but that's a *separate* issue/concern. My point is that Jung himself clearly conceived of "extraverted" and "introverted" types of people, based on and distinguished by their respective attitudes to the object (of their experience). To whatever degree we/others have extended our understanding of Jung's theories and further developed the "eight-function" model to exclude extraversion/introversion as its own distinct dichotomy, that is our own doing -- it is not Jung's model of psychological type.
As a sub-set of that primary (what he calls "basic") typological distinction, Jung then *does* describe in greater detail eight "special types" that have a (dominant) differentiated function as the basis for their individual "peculiarities" -- but he describes them as extraverted or introverted individuals who are predominantly oriented by one of the *four* functions, not as types of people who are defined by one of eight functions.
I believe that we are reading Jung in hindsight, through a lens where the eight functions (Ti/Fi/Te/Fe...) are presupposed and presumably self-evident in his work -- thus re-writing (or at least reinterpreting) Jung's theory to fit the more modernized eight-function theories of Grant/Beebe/et al. Jung himself conceived of eight types of *people* who had a differentiated, dominant orientation -- but derived from only *four* functions.
Whether or not Jung's theories themselves were accurate or can be proven is, again, a separate concern. But we shouldn't conflate the Jungian "types" with the eight-function model(s) seen most frequently promulgated in today's personality type discussions.
/// Below are a few key excerpts from Psychological Types as referenced above... ///
"In the following pages I shall attempt a general description of the psychology of the types, starting with the two basic types I have termed introverted and extraverted. This will be followed by a description of those more special types whose peculiarities are due to the fact that the individual adapts and orients himself chiefly by means of his most differentiated function. [...]
"The attitude-types, as I have repeatedly emphasized in the preceding chapters, are distinguished by their attitude to the object. The introvert’s attitude is an abstracting one; at bottom, he is always intent on withdrawing libido from the object, as though he had to prevent the object from gaining power over him. The extravert, on the contrary, has a positive relation to the object. He affirms its importance to such an extent that his subjective attitude is constantly related to and oriented by the object. The object can never have enough value for him, and its importance must always be increased. The two types are so different and present such a striking contrast that their existence becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out. [...]
“One man resigns himself to circumstances because experience has shown him that nothing else is possible, another is convinced that though things have gone the same way a thousand times before, the thousand and first time will be different. The one allows himself to be oriented by the given facts, the other holds in reserve a view which interposes itself between him and the objective data. Now, when orientation by the object predominates in such a way that decisions and actions are determined not by subjective views but by objective conditions, we speak of an extraverted attitude. When this is habitual, we speak of an extraverted type. If a man thinks, feels, acts, and actually lives in a way that is directly correlated with the objective conditions and their demands, he is extraverted."
This was difficult to grasp for me
Holy Lord yea, that is why I beg them to tell me my BS...because I know that I do not know and do not see as easy as they do...right.
What’s YOUR type?
You’re an amazingly informative and fun tutor and would pretty much raise an interest in this type. #confrontationalAf
It would be better to just use internal/external or internist/externist instead. Introversion/Extroversion are used in everyday language to describe someone's sociability which has nothing to do with how the cognitive functions are set up. This also why so many are mistyped.
An introvert gets their "stimulation" internally, and an extrovert gets their stimulation externally. Introversion and Extroversion refers to the primary mode of stimulation a person exzbits in the way they process information. From the internal or the external. It's about stimulus leading to information processing. Internally or Externally. This is the true meaning of Introvert and Extrovert. Bruce B.
What if we have 3 saviors and 1 demon, but not 2 saviors and 2 demons?
introvert does not equal shy or reclusive... Im an introvert but am outgoing with strangers and friends and love going out at least once a week😊😊😊😊
I really need to show this to my daughter she got ahold of a free test and now thinks she can't function in certain areas! But there is to much cursing in your videos to expose my tween too! Please, please,, please,, clean it up and make it for public consumption to fight all the bad info out there!
Good stuff
What is the difference between concepts and facts?
Infp. If good suprise (ie a pet) I'm in for it.
Why does T have to coin with F?? Why can't I be both introvert and introvert or extrovert extrovert brudda
then your ambi
Could you say Subjective (Introverted) vs. Objective (Extraverted)?
I don't think so.
Probably not
based now on your videos i'm an xntp, gotta watch the rest tho
This video is on point. Sometimes I wonder how accurate is to even include the term "Extroversion/Introversion" in typology when it isn't a real thing on itself
La caja de Pandora I just started to look into introversion and extroversion and I honestly was at a complete lost. For example It seemed crazy that people thought they were "always" draining energy (muddy thinking) when socializing. Even after I had to get them to admit they can enjoy and love socializing, they still continued to say, "it always drains me". Which I would respond, "in the moment to moment enjoyment of the socializing you're saying that you were being impacted negatively and you were being negatively drained?". Such sloppy word usage from people who go around saying introvert this introvert that or extrovert this or that etc. jeez.
@@triplec7713 Even if I'm having a lot of fun socializing it drains me. Drainging doesn't mean it's disgusting, just that it tires me. I have a lot of fun playing hockey but it tires me phisically; if I'm having a lot of fun I can push my body to keep going but that will also mean my body will get even more tired and I'll need more recovery time.
Yes i could never relate to either. Socialising has no impact on my energy. Physical activity is the only thing that has impact on my energy. If I'm doing a lot of things during the day, I'd be tired, if not I'd be restless. Talking and engaging with people has no impact on my energy.
Instead of “skills” you should’ve said “qualities”
If your lead function is extroverted, e.g., Te, Fe, Se, and Ne then you are extroverted. Likewise, if you lead with Ti, Ni, Fi, or Si then your introverted. Prove me wrong. You can’t.
This is how I see the E/I functions.
I = By the book and inside the mind
E = By actions and outside the mind
I'm no longer buying into this function stuff like I was years ago. Seems like total pseudo-science to me. I like the Big Five personality traits.
SilentSputnik yeah the big 5 seems to be a little more practical and easier to understand than the functions/types. Although there isn’t much evidence that either one has any basis is science. At least not yet.
Then why are you here watching this video commenting?
Because it's facaating and I think there is something to it. Just because it's not completely scientific doesn't mean it's meaning less. It's helped me understand my self better and I think it can help people.
Functions are fine, I don't buy into stacks though. Big 5 just measures statistical correlations, not what the types really are. And letters fuck up T/F and especially S/N. I do prefer it when it comes to E/I though. I'm tired of people who spend time alone saying "I'm actually an extravert because I'm externally focused"
You got your explanation of introversion and extroversion wrong. The question is, what energizes you, and what saps your energy, in your daily life? If I'm at a party, my energy level collapses fairly quickly. If I'm thinking about ideas, then I feel very energized. I don't mind being around people, but it becomes overwhelming in a short time. But if I'm working on an idea, I can work on it for hours without interruption.
and people don't understand that socializing can be an introverted activity. If socialising consists on discussing about some topics that energises me because even if i'm interacting with people I'm thinking a lot about ideas so the funtions I'm using the most are my dominant ones.
I agree, my introversion is to do with energy. I can't even discuss topics I love with people when I'm very worn down
Meh, I dunno man, I still think there is such a thing as Introvert / Extrovert, without going into all that Function detail. Otherwise, why would you call someone an ISFP or an ESFP in the first place? Because one is more inclined to Introversion generally, while the other is more inclined to Extroversion generally. Yes, of course everyone "likes surprises" every now and then (It depends what the surprise is!). Of course everyone likes to have some alone time once in a while. Of course the Extrovert can use lots of "Ti" in their reasoning. But I still think you could appropriately label someone as Introverted or Extroverted (Surely? Maybe?). It doesn't matter which Introverted Function the Introvert has in the lead, or which Extroverted Function the Extrovert has in the lead. (And if one truly believes that they are "in between", then they're ambiverted. But then they'd have to call themselves XSFP rather than ISFP or ESFP, you get what I'm saying, bro??)
I think instead of saying you "have" or "use" 4 functions in a stack you better say that's how you "prefer" to view the world/make decisions etc. Considering you can "use" or at least mimic all 8 functions if necessary.
I agree , having a preferences or proclivity for certain functions is what really makes the types differ from eachother , not whether they simply use or have a function (although the fact that we have all the functions is well stipulated in davesuperpowers videos)
no you can't
Te isn't logical
cognitive functions are a abstract concept
Ti/Fe is logical Te/Fi is illogical
That's retarded. Te looks for logical reasons for things. Something as simple as asking "why?" means you're engaging in logic. You might wanna look up what "logic" or "logical" actually means before you use it in a sentence.
4:49 Oooh. So thats why i wanna die
I'm an INTP and I use Fi rather than Fe... My Fe is pretty much non existent. I'm very sure about me being an INTP and not using Fe.
first
I thought that people interested in MBTI and thus psychology would be above this. I guess I was wrong.
+ssesf Movies Pretentious much?
What do you mean?