safsom

These elaborations are all unnecessarily complex, in my opinion. The difference between positive F attitudes and negative F attitudes is rather easy to grasp conceptually, in my view. I prefer to articulate it as emotional “pragmatism” versus emotional “embodiment”.

Unseelies and directives generally repress the controlled embodiment and…[Read more]

The way that I prefer to understand this is actually related the most to introversion and extroversion.

Je and Ji have one fundamental difference to one another. Both of them demarcate boundaries between idealizations of objects (or in other words, they formulate ideal personal values), hence both can be prone to disgust or anger at the internal…[Read more]

you Si blind ENTJ monster, you

I must say that I think that the analogy of a means to monitor vector interactions is quite an accurate one to capture the essence of Je – I see it in a very similar way (but also a subtly different way from the one you have outlined here, which I think will be a point of agreement), where the organization of objects in terms of…[Read more]

Basically everything Nardi has done has been completely made-up.

The methodological rigor behind his studies is basically zero. He based his “function presence” analysis on making people self-type using the interaction styles and other Keirseyan dichotomies (which Keirsey himself has said have no causal link to cognitive functions at all), and…[Read more]

Dario Nardi is a horrible person and a fraud, and if CT is to be taken seriously, I suggest any association or even allusion to his work be removed.

Introduction

Some interesting discussion happening here. In my eyes at least this seems to be all the more reason for CT to stop using Jungian notation as a whole (especially after the metabolic process explication Auburn made in the post above, which I will attempt to address later on this post – both theoretically and in terms of practical and…[Read more]

One thing that I find interesting is that though the correlations you outline seem mainly sound (regarding the orientation that lower Je types might have towards being “theorists” and higher Je types might have towards being “pragmatists), I think the manifestations of this are very likely to be rather different for conductors and revisors – and…[Read more]

Here is where you used the nomenclature. It’s not only on this thread, but several others that I have observed this. I am aware that you were not attempting to introduce Keirseyan baggage into your analysis, but you have to understand the four-letter codes have been used to the point where even without the intention of using them to represent t…[Read more]

I am not here to comment on the typing, but rather the nomenclature used for them. In particular, I would refrain from referring to any CT typing through an MBTI four-letter code.

The four-letter codes have grown to be largely associated with the Keirsey portraits of each type; which differ rather drastically from the observations we can make…[Read more]

@Auburn

Interesting response, however, I do still think that some of the points are missing the mark (albeit being fairly fun for me to engage with and think about). Before I respond to them, however, I will follow your steps for the sake of structure and attempt to summarize the main points for your response as a way to construct my own…[Read more]

Responses

This trend will slowly start in 2025 but really mature by 2035. To give a practical idea of why this seems inevitable to me– it’s because of the power of the form factor and use cases.

While I can see while you may think this, I view this issue rather differently, and this arises out of the necessity to view the emergence and rise to pro…[Read more]