Where Do Our Visitors Come From? Since the Collected Papers section was first posted in late February of 1998 the three front pages of this site have been accessed nearly 100,000 times. With the advent of the Journal in August of 98, the number of visits increased dramatically. More recently we have added a section of the site devoted to Personality Type, Organizational Form, and the Structure of Consciousness. While still under development, it has nonetheless also begun to attract visitors. Approximately 200 individuals now visit the three respective front pages of this suite of web-sites each day. Although we don't count the number of times the numerous other backpages at the site are directly accessed, our server report that some of these are amongst the most frequently accessed pages that they currently offer. During the past year individuals from seventy countries have visited 'The Enneagram and the MBTI' - Argentina, Australia, Austria, Barbados, Belgium, Bermuda, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jamaica, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malaysia, Malta, Maldives, Mexico, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, New Zealand, Oman, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, the Russian Federation, South Africa, South Korea, Qatar, Singapore, Slovenia, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Trinidad and Tobago, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and the United States, Uruguay, Venezuela.	What Kind of Communications Are Currently Taking Place at This Site? We receive approximately 600 emails per month generated by material presented at the site, and a half dozen hardcopy letters. The messages that we received regarding the written and visual works of art that are displayed in the Journal are not included here in the 'Letters to the Editor' column. Excerpts from visitor emails regarding these topics can be found in the respective sections devoted to these concerns - in the Typewriter and Art and Personality sections. Nor have we included confidential conversations initiated by individuals interested in coming to a better understanding of their own Enneagram and MBTI types and the relationship between the two systems as they experience these manifesting within themselves. There is also little point in reproducing the requests that we receive for technical assistance, unless we feel that others will benefit from the answers. A few individuals each month seek assistance in downloading the condensed pdf file that contains the entire 'collected papers' site for off-line reading, make requests to be included on various mailing lists, and seek help with how to use the message board. We also continue to receive, on a daily basis, responses to the 33 question experimental indicator (FD33) that we put up in August. Approximately 30,000 individuals have taken the experimental 33-question preference order indicator since then. We treat the forms that they submit as confidential communications and will not share individual responses publicly, but will report further on our findings in the future (a Preliminary Report was posted in the Second Issue of the Journal). So what HAVE we included here in the 'Letters to the Editor' section? A number of messages that do not fit within the other communication formats that we offer - short messages that are left at the guestbook, ones emailed to us directly from the site, or hard-copy letters sent via the post office. When these initiate a two-party correspondence that may be beneficial to our readership at large, however, we try to include them in the Conversations column - in this issue we run a dialogue on the nomenclature associated with the FD33.

Messages/Letters (received since last issue):

Dear Editors, I've started a new club in the Yahoo! domain that may be a worthy link on your site. It was my intention to provide a non-combative environment for INTJs looking for meaningful insight. So far, it seems to be working out well..... It is located at: http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/intjalternative. Thank you, Michele Hausman Ventura, California We visited, Michele. looks good. Best of luck with it. We'd be interested in knowing how it goes, so keep in touch. We appreciate what you are trying to do. Doesn't there seem to be something about the way lists work that allows contentiousness to easily get out of control? As compared to face-to-face meetings, that is. Its not easy to have a fruitful more-than-two-person discussion on a list, or even in a chatroom. These environments seem to pose special problems for faciliators, no? Its our policy to link only to specific content that is explicitly referred to in an article or discussion, or from within the letters that appear in the 'letters to the editor' column. Since your letter will be included, there'll be a link. The new issue of our Journal will be posted in a week, which is when the new letters go up. Thanks for the encouragement and the link! About this "list/chat" contentiousness thing~~this could be an "Internet Phenomena" that may be worth some research in and of itself! In the case of our little "alternative" club, as founder, I'm bound and determined to keep everyone on a positive footing! I will happily stay in touch..... Again, thanks, Michele Hausman

February 11, 2000 Dear Editors, Thank you so much for your excellent exposition on the feeling function. This is the first time i've felt a solid understanding of any function and can hardly wait for the others in "dimensions of...". When will it be ready? Janine You are most welcome! In recent months we've posted a lot of papers. [Please see This Issue for a rundown on what we've been up to lately]. But we still have a rather substantial backlog of unposted material. We are slowly but surely chipping away at it, though. In the next few months we plan to put up a series of papers that we previously wrote on the feeling function, at our Organization site - one for each level of development. The first will appear in March. Not until after that is finished do we plan to turn our attention to posting material on the other functions.

Feb 10, 2000 Dear John, I read your article about String Theory and consciousness [A Conversation with Pysicist Brian Greene] and without going into detail, as a mystic I want to assure you that you are correct! Debra Thanks. I'm glad you took the time to write and I appreciate the sentiment you express and the support you offer. To be sure, my characterization of consciousness as liminocentric did not arise primarily from theoretical considerations or philosophical speculation. It originally came from direct personal experience of a sort that is perhaps most aptly described as mystic - if one is limited to one word to do so. That kind of experience is unfortunately not commonplace in our culture. Nor is it valued. Even at the height of their popularity, both Freud and Jung did everything in their power to avoid being characterized as mystics - a rather chilling thought for an 'iNtuitive', given the fact that things have not changed all that much since then. The problem is compounded by the fact that mystics can be prone to hyperbole, and sometimes seem to delight in confounding their listeners. Its almost a kind of occupational hazard, I'd suggest - resulting from insight into, and acceptance of, the inextricably paradoxical nature of things. But in my view we shouldn't make mysticism any more mystifying than it need be. It ultimately clarifies. And it thus promises to offer a valuable perspective for addressing the problems with which contemporary philosophers and psychologists struggle. This, in any case, is why I have striven to try to clearly explain, in psychological and philosophical terms, what others may be happy to accept as ineffable mystical truth. John

Jan 24, 2000 Dear Editors, I read your wonderful introduction to The 5 Levels of the 4 Jungian Functions and would like to share with you my attempt to describe primary Intuition with Thinking to the intj e-mail list at onelist.com. Although a layperson, I have attempted to describe the process as accurately as possible based on my own experience and that of others who describe themselves as intuitives. I agree with your contention that "we are more likely to think of 'hunches' and/or 'premonitions' as exemplary of intuition, although these activities are relatively lower level activities on the continuum associated with that function." I am also concerned that as a result Intuition is being misrepresented too often; also, I am concerned that primary intuitives who are NT are being encouraged to think of themselves as if they were primary thinkers. I was drawn to this subject because, in the past, I have dropped out of therapy after being told that I "think too much" or must be untruthful because I do not always offer concrete, sensate descriptions of my own mind and memory while I am trying to tell the therapist what I am feeling about some subject. The discussion was casual, if energetic, and I permitted myself to speculate: A list member wrote: "But wouldn't taking a multitude of facts and making new connections be an intuitive process?" Not in the concrete sense [which a list member had described, and which seems to be the one] defined as SiTe. Intuition perceives systematically, but the process he described required conscious precision and memorization, neither of which are necessary to an intuitive process. NTs apply precision during the Judging process. Intuitives tend to come to the conclusion first, and then go looking for a way to construct a factual argument in support of it. [There's an old joke among engineers that a specification is what you write up AFTER the actual work has been done.] Just as an Intuitive can develop and use Sensing, similarly Sensors can, and do, develop Intuition, particularly after the kind of education that tends to stress it. He said that the rest of the people in his department did not understand his precision thought process, and the reason is that they are not using it. They are using NT or TN processes in which most ideas remain global and algorithmic until they are evaluated. "How can you dream articulately without a language?" Generally, if you're a primary Intuitive, you don't - you dream visually, spatially and dynamically, with language and Judging functions coming in as supports. Just as [the UNIX operating system] calls daemons to do specific tasks, so Intuition calls Thinking to apply the judging process to those systems perceived by the Intuition. Sensing is semi-consciously present to provide the data to Intuition, but this data is not often fed directly to the Judging function. [The computing metaphor here is one of nested procedures, although of course the mind is in chaotic states characterized by learning. Some people perceive all their Intuition as one large system; others describe interrelated systems or a web of connected ideas and perceptions. Everyone, on the entp and intj lists, who has tried to describe what is going on, talks about dynamism and change.] Another list member then wrote: " So I experience intuition as extra knowledge that I get over and above what my senses tell me. Sometimes a whole lot of knowledge, sometimes a little. It wasn't until I read Jungian theory that I became aware of how much I use and rely on it." This is lovely, and all to the good, but it's not a description of a primary Intuitive. I perceive my senses as extra knowledge above and beyond what my spatial pre-verbal systems are telling me. Unconscious to the strong Sensor, the Intuitive systems are to me available real-time for manipulation by the judging processes. There's nothing "extra" about them. Those spatial pre-verbal systems are where I live. Another list member wrote: "Spatial pre-verbal system'-will you define that more clearly for me, please? I think I see you, but it may only be a picture in my mind." At first, it is just that - a picture. The Platonic world of forms is initially a hazy place. (Some think Plato was an INTJ, and his idea of "forms" an attempt to describe introverted intuition.) You don't actually see "me," even if there is an object there having inherent existence in the first place. You see a construction based on your own mental and sensory processes. If your mental processes are intuitive, you will dynamically connect what you consider you see to the systems already formed in your mind. Assuming your fact-checking (Thinking Judging function) has been evaluating things correctly, you will be able to add prior and current knowledge together and evaluate both together. This may be the basis for the high IQ common among intuitives. The Buddhists, and nowadays some physicists, would go further and question the idea of inherent existence in the first place. It generally takes an intuitive to point out that culturally received concretized forms (sensory forms) cannot always be trusted. Another list member wrote: "Actually I think that would be. I have an awareness of an image in my mind, however I have not the language ability to define it or to describe it." Yes, and to make it worse, even if you describe it verbally as accurately as you or anyone can, you know that you have not really done the image justice. I think this realization is what drives some people to art, as it were. Later I added: "I couldn't be a Sensor if I tried, and I'm sure many Intuitives have tried, at one time or another, stuck in families or jobs where it was expected. But there's nothing wrong with it, and I'm surprised to see it's become such an epithet here, along with Feeling. My SO is ESTJ and is one of the best people you could ever hope to know. Type bias leads to nowhere. But identity politics could be interesting, and useful, perhaps along an intuitive/gifted/ADD radical axis." Intuitives usually know one another. That is the most surprising thing about this whole discussion, such as it has been, so far. Social survival in American society pretty much requires introverted intuitives to be able to spot one another and form groups of support, usually around some topic designated too weird for SJ's. So I found it pretty surprising to hear assertions that I should not be able to spot who the intuitives are unless I'm a credentialled expert of some sort. But so what? And it's not as if someday, somehow, we're going to start checking type badges at the door. So, hey, if you're an SJ in SLC and you want to join the LARP [Live Action Role-playing fantasy gaming group] I'm organizing, feel welcome 8) I should not trust the opinion of a credentialled non-intuitive on this issue over a mature intuitive. A similar argument can be made for "gaydar," the way gays tend to spot one another, while a gay person could talk to a straight therapist for years and not be correctly read. The same fellow goes down to the local bookstore cafe and gets asked out by the end of the evening! How does this happen? But we all know how it happens. Activism threw me into the deep end of the pool, quickly. I learned for myself how little most "experts" know about minorities of any sort. I now listen to the minorities first. Thanks very much for your attention. I wish you the very best as you pursue this vital subject. Sincerely, Brenda Mobley Thank you for sharing with us your thoughts regarding intuition, and some of the dialogues that you've had with others on this topic. I've interspersed a few specific comments at appropriate points within your original message [omitted here]. Have you explored our Javascript Tool for Exploring Typological Space? If, in the top frame, you click on 'INTJ' (for instance) and then on the 'N' in the left-hand frame below that, you will find in the window in the bottom left corner our brief description of the 5 levels of the Intuitive function. It is the best short description of the levels that we've been able to come up with to date, and reads as follows - FIVE LEVELS OF THE INTUITIVE FUNCTION Level-One Intuition Level-one intuition is inferior, developmentally speaking. At this level intuitions are typically experienced as premonitions or 'suspicions' (as Von Franz mentions), vaguely associated with 'death' or 'objectlessness'. They threaten to de-stabilize the individual, pulling the rug out from under her sense of 'reality'. Individuals at this stage may deny the existence of intuition as a mental faculty, or, unable to do so, fall under the grip of relatively crass ('occult') spiritual systems or practices. Level-Two Intuition At the second level of development of the intuitive function, the individual starts to accept the prospect of change, explore 'possibilities' and acknowledge an innate capacity to predict future outcomes by looking into what is presently 'unknown'. She pays attention to her 'hunches', and can see crises as 'opportunities in disguise'. Learning to 'let go' she becomes able to accept ambiguity and play with it. Open to inspiration, she can appreciate what it is to be able to think 'out of the box', to brainstorm, to imagine. Level-Three Intuition At the third level of development of the intuitive function, the individual acquires a deeper appreciation for 'symbols' - those strange entities that 'point beyond' themselves to a 'whole' that is somehow, paradoxically, contained within the symbol itself. Metaphor is explored, and 'irony' - the capacity of things to 'be what they are not'. Intuition, or 'inspiration', is recognized as the faculty that puts one in touch with the source of creativity - a level of awareness that precedes and underlies the figure-ground duality, which arises out of it. One may thus become familiar with experiences of 'emptiness' (in the Buddhist sense of the word) or 'absence'. Level-Four Intuition At the fourth level of development of the intuitive function, the individual's interest in 'symbol' broadens to include an appreciation for the larger systems - the 'paradigms' and 'myths' - in which they are embedded. Skill in de-construction of existing frames, and thus in paradigm shifting, is acquired - one learns to 'ACTIVELY imagine' (Jung's phrase). Anomaly and paradox become increasingly important and one uses them to tap into the 'source' and play with the Root Metaphors that are the seed around which paradigms form and from which culturally relevant creations emerge. Level-Five Intuition At the fifth level of development of the intuitive function, the individual participates in the co-creation of the socio-symbolic fields in which she is immersed. An appreciation for complex (and paradoxical) whole-part relationships emerge - holographic, fractal organizations which wrap back around on themselves in such a way that the part 'includes' the whole, and the largest is experienced as 'within' the smallest. An undifferentiated holistic awareness that is not 'object-oriented' is realized and integrated into everyday bifurcated consciousness.

January 21, 2000 Dear Editors, A few months ago I began investigating the MBTI and Enneagram stuff to better understand myself. As I got into it more, I began to see the applications in my business. I am planning to take a seminar and get certified to give the MBTI. Do you have any recommendations? I recently printed out some documents from you website. I really found the ESTJ bias articles interesting. Now that I think about it, it explains many of the problems I had working in state government and in the corporate world. Fortunately times are changing. I believe Peter Drucker is writing about the need to replace EST managers with NT/NF managers. By the way, I love your Javascript web site. It really provides easy to understand information on personality types. Definitely the best thing I have seen on the web. Your excellent work has had a major impact on me. I now have the incentive I need to go finish my doctorate - I will be changing my major from civil engineering to human development or psychology. This is interesting stuff!!! Thanks. D.D. Glad to have been of help. Good luck with your plans!

January 21, 2000 Dear Editors, I found your website through a search robot by using the keywords "development of feeling", and I was looking for exactly the kind of material that you have started to make available. I'm in the process of writing up a paper called "Dimensions of consciousness development. A preliminary outline," which outlines some of the more important dimensions of cognitive, feeling, imaginal and self-related dimensions of consciousness development, and discusses how they relate to each other. I was provoked to do this by a chapter in Ken Wilber's recent book "Integral psychology". Some years ago I wrote a listserv post on the development of the feeling function, based on some extrapolation from Hillman's treatment in "Jung's typology". This was only a brief sketch though (available on my website: http://home.t-online.de/ home/Perspectus/ Essayfeeling.html). I'm very glad that there are some people who are thinking and writing about this topic more earnestly. It is deplorable that so little has been done in this field, where so essential and significant elements of human life happens. I would like to get the full text, when it becomes available. I can't give you any deeper comment now, as I haven't had time to read and reflect enough. The spontaneous impression I had after a brief scanning is that perhaps you are not differentiating different aspects of feeling: differentiation of emotions, increasingly conscious value assignment function, empathy, management of shared feeling states, etc. Maybe they are all aspects of the same process, but maybe they are also partly independent, I don't know. I'm currently doing empirical research on consciousness development in the social realm, through a study of how people make sense of their own workplace conflict experiences. This might be of interest to you, but nothing is published yet. I have also a website with some material which you might find interesting, in particular the article "Conflicts as yoga. Mindfulness in conflicts as a path of consciousness development". In this text I define a large number of different dimensions of consciousness development. You are welcome to take a look: http://home.t-online.de/ home/Perspectus/ index.htm I'm glad I found your site, and hope I'll get to see more writings on development of the four functions. Do you know any good material on development of intuition and imagining faculties? Best wishes, Thomas Jordan, Dr. By the first week of May we will post the first of three parts (corresponding to levels One, Two, and Three) of our "In-Depth Look at Theories of Emotion" at the Dimensions of Human Space site. In subsequent months the remaining parts will appear. As you will see, what we did in that work - which was written 5 years ago now - is to classify theories of emotion and feeling into five groups associated with the five levels that we phenomenologically describe elsewhere at that site. We also intend to post further papers from that period - on intuition - at that site. But it might take us a while to get to it. (In the meantime, see other letters in this issue [1] [2] [3]). I did do a quick visit to your site, where I was immediately attracted to the piece called 'structures of consciousness'. Will read it along with the papers that you recommend, including the one on feeling. Last year, in July, I gave a talk on "The Structure of Consciousness" at a small interdisciplinary conference. I presented the view that not only can consciousness be conceived as structured, as C.O. Evans and I have maintained since the 1970s, it may also have what I have more recently decided to call a 'liminocentric' structure. This talk led to two further papers. One is entitled A Conversation With Pysicist Brian Greene; the other is called The Structure of Consciousness - Liminocentricity, Enantiodromia, and Personality. My interest in the structure of consciousness goes back to a model of consciousness that Evans and I presented in a monograph entitled Consciousness in 1976. We recently made this and related materials available on-line at http://www.mentalstates.net. For that occasion I wrote a paper that is presented there, The Subject of Consciousness Revisited, which gives a brief synopsis of the model and locates it within work that has been done in the fields of philosophy of mind and psychology since the 1970s. 'Feeling' plays a large role in the model that we presented, as you will see if you visit the site. The model gives what I now think of as a paradigmatic 'level 3' explication of feeling - as you'll see in the soon-to-be-posted piece on level 3 theories, mentioned above. I am eager to look at the work at your site, and imagine that I will be interested in commenting. But since I probably won't be available to do that during the next three weeks I didn't want to postpone replying to you until then. I also thought that I'd give you a bit of a head start by sending along the above URLs. John

Jan 20, 2000 Dear Editors, I have greatly enjoyed reading your papers and I appreciate your quick response to my e-mail. I am an ENTP Civil Engineer turned consultant becoming immersed in the MBTI/Enneagram Stuff. I took your pref. order test and was somewhat confused with the results (n=14,s=7,f=5,t=11). Does this mean that n followed by t and then s and f is my preference ordering? I usually test out as an ENTP although I really believe I am more of an introvert. D.D. As an ENTP your preference order, according to MBTI assumptions, would be N-T-F-S. Our test suggests that your preference order may be N-T-S-F - which is rather close to that. Why the difference? On the MBTI it is impossible to come out an N-T-S-F, as it is ASSUMED that if N is dominant, S must be inferior. The same goes for T and F. Our test, however, does not treat N and S (or T and F) as dependent variables. Thus one might even test as an N-S-T-F or an N-S-F-T. In other words, if your preferred function is N and your next most-preferred function is T, then the MBTI will of necessity identify you as an individual with N-T-F-S preference order even if your preference order actually is N-T-S-F. In your case, the F and S scores on the FD33 are very close. So there is a possiblity that S actually is your inferior function. Here is a question that might help you to figure out which function is the 'inferior' one - which is the one that you have the most trouble with?

Jan 18, 2000 Dear Editors, Thank you for maintaining this site. I'm going to try to make more time to read it more carefully to obtain any fresh new insights (Oh, so 5!) Thanks, Dr. Anthony F., INTJ 5 Let us know what you think.

January 17, 2000 Dear Editors, I have been coaching business leaders for about 10 years and have administered the MBTI and Enneagram (along with other instruments) to determine their types and adaptive behaviors with the purpose of better understanding their "hardware and software". I found the two instruments, used together, potentiated each other. Thus, when I found your web sight I was thrilled and intrigued with the work you have created. While contemplating your theories, I decided that it would be useful to have your book and/or papers on this new view of personality typing. I am particularly interested in researching more about how the T/F "push-pull" can create neurosis as that affect certaily seems applicable to the challenges I have experienced in work and family life. I would very much appreciate information about any publications or other web sights so that I can continue my research. I would be willing to work with someone who could assist me with some analysis of my particular type as well as the ability to dialog about specifics of my behavior. Let me know if you can be of assistance or can recommend someone. Sincerely, D.C., ENTJ 1 Yes, the two systems seem to complement each other, don't they? And it really is interesting how the enantiodromic relationship between T and F (and also between N and S) can create difficulties for the individual, isn't it? But it is also the source of great creativity. We'd be happy to talk with you further about this. Have you taken our FD33 ? We don't have a book out, but do have a couple thousand pages of papers. A few years ago we decided that instead of trying to send copies of individual papers to interested parties we'd post them on the web - where they can be easily accessed, at comparatively low cost. We are hoping to be able, in the future, to provide a CD with the entire site on it, for off-line viewing. In the meantime, if you want a hard copy of the printout of all three of our personality sites (approximately 800 xeroxed pages) we can send that to you at the cost of $100 plus shipping. To answer your question about other sources on this subject - the papers that we have posted are pretty meticulously referenced. These citations include web site URLs, as appropriate.

Jan 15, 2000 Dear Editors, Looks like a very interesting site and topics and I will visit again when I have more time. Gerald O., Ph. D. Please do.

Jan 12, 2000 Dear Editors, I was very excited to see your article, Toward a Diversity of Psychological Type in Organization. I am a recovering stressed out 41-year old INFP. Thanks for the validation. L.B. Glad to be of assistance. Thanks for the support!

Jan 8, 2000 Dear Editors, Very interesting; accessed through interest in the enneagram. My interest is individual rather than organizational. J.A.W.

Jan 5, 2000 Dear Editors, Hello. A friend of mine accidently found your website, and knowing I was an eneagram enthusiast, he forwarded it to me. I think your site is a wonderful place for insightful reading. I only just found the site now and have only peripherally browsed through it, but I am greatly intrigued. I'd love to set up a dialogue with you because I am sure I will have questions about the content of your site. I am also connected with some enneagram groups that might be interested in having you speak. Feel free to contact me at [address omitted]; otherwise I'll email you my first set of questions later! What a great resource! I am so glad to find your site! Pamela P. Thank you for your comments and for the interest that you are expressing in our site. What kind of dialogue are you interested in having? If you have a list of questions, send them. We'd be glad to entertain them.

Jan 5, 2000 Dear Editors, The MBTI and Keirsey's book "Please Understand Me" proved very useful to me in my marital relationship and has given me a format and vocabulary with which to comprehend and consider other people's ways and preferences. Keirsey's book is very interesting, but it doesn't thoroughly discuss the background behind how the theory was derived or whether it has been carefully scrutinized. At the suggestion of an entry in your journal I read "Katharine and Isabel" to gain insight into the steps that were taken to create the indicator and evaluate the "science" behind the test and type descriptions. The book turned out to be a biography with amazingly little devoted to the scientific process of creating and testing the MBTI and it's theory. (To illuminate, the book mentions that a longitudinal test was conducted with medical students but it doesn't state the study's hypothesis, the methods I am looking for papers to answer some of my looming questions, some of which are: How have the character descriptions been validated? What evidence is there that all individuals fit succinctly into one of the 16 types? How often do people take the MBTI and find the character descriptions to be accurate? If a person is tested twice how likely is it that both tests will turn out the same (for example, if an "N" person does a lot of "S" type work and then takes the test again)? I realize it is a "theory", but being so popular and widely used one expects there would have been attempts to test and criticize it. I haven't yet found any such analysis in your archive. Perhaps you could point me to some studies that investigated the MBTI theory? Best Regards, Cristy (INFJ) P.S. Your web site was a wonderful find which I look forward to utilizing further in my investigation and contemplation of personality psychology : ) Thank you for your letter. Generally speaking, we'd agree with you that relatively little material is available regarding the theoretical foundations for any of these systems. Believing that there are too few people out there who are interested in theoretical issues and in-depth critique, book and journal editors in general tend to shy away from publishing explorations of that sort. In designing our website, we had hoped to provide a different type of forum - in which theoretical issues could be raised, and discussed. And we hoped to be able to offer an environment conducive to discussing and debating these issues in a respectful and congenial way, in the spirit of scientific collaboration. You've probably seen our paper on Keirsey's new book. If not, you can find it at - http://tap3x.net/EMBT/j3keirsey.html The questions you ask are good ones. The answers to some (eg, How often do people take the MBTI and find the character descriptions to be accurate) ARE available - in the materials that the MBTI uses to train those who administer the indicator. You are also more likely to find studies related to these kinds of questions addressed in the hardcopy journals associated with the MBTI (such as the APT Journal), than in popular books on the subject of type. But even in this format it is empirical research that tends to be emphasized (because our culture honors that approach), and discussions of theoretical issues are not frequently entered into. At our site we have pioneered the discussion of so many theoretical issues related to the relationship between the MBTI and the Enneagram that it would be difficult to list them all here. And since these issues are often complex, and consensus has not be arrived at regarding how these are to be resolved, it would not be easy to point you in a single direction for an 'answer' to your questions. And, quite frankly, the answer to such questions often depends on who you're talking to, and in what frame of reference they prefer to operate. Let me give an example. In the course of a rather lengthy email debate regarding the J/P designation, John made an argument similar to yours above - against the conventional wisdom that MBTI type is not subject to change. He presented the case of someone who first tested as 'J' (an INFJ, to be specific) and then, after a period of time (which included longterm exposure to certain forms of meditation practice), latter tested as a 'P'. But that individual's scores on the other scales remained the same. Does this mean that that INFJ had become an INFP? If so, according to MBTI assumptions, this would mean that the person's preference order had shifted from N-F-T-S to F-N-S-T. This seems rather unlikely, as such a tremendous shift (from introverted intuition and extraverted feeling to introverted feeling and extraverted intuition) in preference order would be rather unusual! But such a conclusion would be a NECESSARY theoretical consequence of MBTI assumptions! John's argument was that the absurd positon in which this assumption puts us actually calls into question the assumption itself (the one regarding how preference order can be inferred from the J/P score). From this example it should be obvious that you can't use the MBTI to 'test' for whether the INFJ's preference order has shifted from N-F-T-S to F-N-S-T when he later scores as a 'P' - simply because preference order is inferred FROM the j/p score. You'd need some other instrument. To my knowledge, this has not been investigated until we recently took it upon ourselves to devise a test (the FD33) that sought to identify preference-order in a way that is independent of the individual's J/P score. There has been much testing of the MBTI; the validity of the test is, of course, an important matter. But only certain KINDS of testing takes place. Singer and Loomis (two Jungian analysts), for example, questioned the assumption that if S (or T) is a dominant function, N (or F) must be inferior, and vice versa. They could not 'test' this assumption by using the MBTI and seeing how many people have non-conventional preference orders, because as a result of the way the MBTI is scored, it is simply ASSUMED that such combinations don't exist. So Singer and Loomis had to devise their own test (the SLIP, or Singer-Loomis Personality Indicator) - a new instrument that permits preference order arrangements that are not permitted in the MBTI - the N-S-T-F order, or N-T-S-F order, for instance. Then they tested individuals, to see how many fell into the 'unconventional' preference order patterns that are not permitted by the MBTI, and how many didn't. Many more than they had expected, as it turns out. 'Investigating' a theory often starts with raising theoretical issues. The impulse to do this comes from various quarters - sometimes from evidence or experience contrary to prevailing theoretical assumptions, sometimes from linguistic or philosophical concerns. At our site, we've raised dozens of such issues, although probably not ALL of the ones that you'd like to see raised. Check out our paper on the J/P question, in this issue. And also the dialogue on that subject. These pieces should give you some idea of the complexity involved in posing and answering this type of theoretical-level question.

January 5, 2000 Dear Editors, I've recently read Lenore Thomson's book on MBTI and Riso and Hudson's "The Wisdom of the Enneagram." This website ties things together, it is exciting stuff! Suzanne Knutzen Thank you. We're interested in how things things tie together, and glad to know that others also find this exciting!

Jan 5, 2000 Dear Editors, Hi. I have read through several of the sites referencing MBTI and the Enneagram and have found it extremely interesting. I've been wondering about the correlation between the two for some 6 years or so--ever since I took my first class on the Enneagram. I've been familiar with MBTI for almost 15 years and have been tested 3 times. So, you may be surprised to find out that this particular 4 is also an ESFP rather than an I or an N. I enjoy reading about all the studies--thank you so much for doing them. J. Its okay to test as an ESFP and Enneagram 4, although we must say that we're always intrigued when someone has a statistically uncommon MBTI and Enneagram combination. So we're usually curious to know more. Have you taken our FD33? Also, since you've had fifteen years of involvement with the MBTI, and have thought about the relationship between it and the Enneagram, you probably have some good ideas about what attracts you, as an ESFP, to E4. Care to share them? I just took the FD33 and sent you the results. I don't understand how I can test so strongly as an "S" on the MBTI yet it appears that "N" outweighed my "S" on your instrument ... Truthfully, I'm not sure that I'm "attracted" by E4. Neither am I overwhelmed at being labeled a flighty, over-emotional ESFP, and long before I heard of either instrument I spent years in therapy trying to learn to be like other people--responsible, stable, persistent--you know all the "SJ" standards. Yet, I can also truthfully say that it felt great to finally understand that I was ok, albeit different from the rest of my SJ family. Maybe being so different triggered the "specialness" that 4's tend to feel. ... [As a child I was repeatedly also told] that I was "more spiritually sensitive than most people". Aside from theories, I can tell you that it often feels as if I have 2 distinct personalities. I have always fought depression and melancholy and the tendency to feel sorry for myself is an ongoing battle. I love to think about things, to discuss philosophy (and am now beginning to read the great philosophers .. [I have recently attended] a lecture series on existentialism). I'm extremely interested in spirituality (I'm also a strong, non-church going Christian). I'm interested in what motivates people, the WHY of everything--especially why people are the way they are, and if they can be changed. I'm told that I have keen insight into people and have the ability to cut right to the heart of matters. Yet, when it's time for the lights to come on the party to start, I'm right in the thick of things. So, it's sort of a duality, and I often wonder if one is the real me (probably the 4 part of me) and the other is just a coping mechanism to deal with people--but then, I decide that it really doesn't matter if we're all having a good time! (grin) I'd be interested in any feedback you have about my observations, and I'd be glad to answer any more questions. Does your test indicate that I've been mis-typed all of these years? J. Generally speaking, when there is a clash between personality theory and what one observes in a particular individual one can try to reconcile the two by either making the individual fit the theory or revising the theory to accomodate the individual. If the fit between the two is not good it is very easy to assume that the individual is to blame; for it is comparatively very difficult to recognize glitches in theory. But it actually may be the theory that is at fault. For example - imagine for a moment that you do indeed prefer N and S (or S and N) as the first two functions in your 'preference order', as is suggested by your FD33 scores. This would not only be contrary to your expectations (on the basis of your MBTI scores), it would be a theoretical IMPOSSIBILITY given the assumptions of the MBTI. For, in the MBTI, if you have S as first function, you MUST have N as the inferior or last function (and vice versa). But why? Because this is an assumption (passed down by Jung) about how these things work - about the nature of the relationship between S and N, and between F and T. But it is an assumption that has been called into questioned. Two contemporary Jungian analysts (Singer and Loomis) explicitly scrutinized this assumption, and this is what motivated them to design an alternative to the MBTI. Unlike the MBTI, which treats N and S as two poles on the same 'scale' (so that the higher you score in S, the lower you score in N - and vice versa), the SLIP (Singer-Loomis Personality Indicator) treats them as independent scales (so that you can score high in both, or low in both). When Singer and Loomis used their instrument to test people they discovered that there are in fact quite a few who will have N and S (or S and N) as their first two functions [1]. Our test (the FD33) also treats all four functions as independent variables and permits individuals to score that way. In fact, we got the idea of doing this from Singer and Loomis. At the very least, your FD33 scores [which are high in N and S, and suggest a possible N-S-F-T preference order] would seem to indicate that your preference for S and N may be more or less in COMPETITION with each other, as opposed to being at opposite ends of the preference order. This may not be as uncommon a phenomenon as the Jungian/MBTI assumption would have us think. Otto Rank, a student of Freud's, built his whole approach to psychotherapy around what he discovered happening in the artist, with whom he was an extremely popular analyst. In the artist, he said, there is an attempt to work out the tension that exists between 'life' (S) and 'art' or 'imagination' (N). Making manifest the possibilities of the imagination - this is almost a DEFINITION of art. So it is not surprising to learn that artists, who are characteristically engaged in this kind of 'creative' endeavor, would find Rank's approach insightful. Once we theoretically recognize the potential for this particular kind of struggle, it only requires one short step to recognize it as a struggle between S and N. Similar struggles can take place between F and T. These can manifest as a tension between individual autonomy (T, control) and group cohesion (F). Interestingly, what you say about your 'two personalities' appears to be in general agreement with what we are saying here. Your description of the Enneagram 4 is quite good - it is apparently a description that comes from experience, from the inside out. Philosophy, lectures on existentialism, melancholy, insight - these are Fourish pre-occupations. One doesn't typically find these kinds of interests in the ESFP. And yet you also describe a 'second personality' that likes people and partying, and is extroverted. Perhaps individuals who have this kind of competition between N and S (or F and T) will, by virtue of it, bring the respective creative 'tensions' that are within all of us more explicitly to the surface. They may take it to be their 'job', for whatever reason, to deal with and reconcile those tensions, which most people simply avoid by 'not prefering' one or the other of the two poles. One more thing - if there are more possible preference orders than are permitted by the MBTI, then there will also be more personality types than the MBTI has accounted for. And for each of these, there should be a description. But, of course, there isn't. The esfp, for example, is an E (extravert) who has a 'p' preference (for non-closure) and an S-F-T-N preference order. That is the combination that is being characterized by the 'description' that is given of the esfp by the MBTI. But what about the E, with 'p' preference, and S-F-N-T preference order? Or S-N-F-T preference order? We don't have an (MBTI) name for these. But doesn't it stand to reason that they will require a different description? And that such an individual may not necessarily feel completely comfortable with the esfp description? We shouldn't make the mistake of thinking that such an individual HAS to fit one of the 16 traditional MBTI descriptions - although he or she may feel comfortable with certain aspects of one or another of those descriptions.

Jan 5, 1999 I'd like to connect with the INFP community. Can you help? J.N. [Kathy Harris, a member of an INFP email list came to the rescue and sent J.N. a URL where he can find the addresses for two INFP lists - http://www.typelogic.com/infp.html]

Jan 5, 2000 This is the first time I hear about enneagram and I'm curious. I cannot yet give more opinion than that. Anyway I'm glad you go deep into understanding of human nature. Mario Quesada Thanks, Mario. When you've formed an opinion let us know what you think.

December 30, 1999 Dear Editors, A very intriguing site. I've been a 'surface surfer' with the MBTI and enneagram, and am enjoying learning more. When first taking the MBTI 15 years ago, I was an infj. Taking the Keirsey Temperament Sorter I was scored as an infp. The 5 enneagram type with a 4 wing has remained constant over the past decade (I first was typed about 10 years ago). Can you suggest a site with more fundamental information? Thanks again for a most interesting site. L.J., infj 5 We'd be interested in knowing how you score on our FD33. Have you Von Franz's book on type? Or the MBTI 'Gifts Differing'? There are also a number of books on the Enneagram that we've referenced in the papers that make up our recent Mandala series. These resources provide good basic information. You might also check out http://www.mbtypeguide.com/Type

Dec 18, 1999 Been studying MBTI for years, have had occasional contact with enneagrams, and very interested in relationships between both systems and shadow work. Nico C. Would be interested in hearing any comments you may have on the views we put forward regarding that topic in our Mandala series.

December 28, 1999 Hi, I just discovered your website and am interested in all your articles but not as informed as your other readers. I wonder if it is current? Are you still updating it? The newsgroup section was not operating when I tried it. And, if you're interested in what I'd like to discuss in a chatroom, I think it's interesting to analyze movies in terms of personality theory. I had a great time reading John Fudjack's article on Nine Qualities of the Enlightened Being. Thanks, Kim You're welcome. And yes, we think the material is current. Even though some of the articles are a few years old, we'd say pretty much the same things today as we said at the time. Every few months we post a new issue of the Journal, and papers are added to the other areas also, as needed and when we get the chance. We hope to have the message board up and running again sometime in the future, and like your idea about a movie list.

December 20, 1999 Fascinating! Thank you so much for making your work available in this way. Autie Lea You're welcome.

Dec 20, 1999 I'm an armchair psychologist and a prominent poster to a certain (non-personality-type based) web page. In casual conversation, I discovered that, of the people who responded to my query, 75% are INFPs. I came to this site to get some stats to share with the group. Donna M. Good. Did you get what you need? Wow! I was just signing your guestbook, should have taken the time to finish my sentence. I found *exactly* what I needed. Thanks for asking.

Dec 20, 1999 Dear Editors, I have lost the chart that you compare the enneagram types with the astrology signs, so please send it to me by e-mail. Haralabos Mihailidis Sorry, you must be thinking of another site. On this site we never made any connections with astrological signs.

December 6, 1999 John, ... I have visited your site recently, and enjoyed the reading and insights. I can see that you have been very busy, and have produced very good work, ideas, and insights. I hope you do not mind, but I referred to your article that reveals info about iNfp's on one of the INFP lists, which subsequently led some of the INFP list members to take your test. Now we are ALL wondering about your iNfp theory. I have been asked to give my thoughts of interpretation on the matter, but hesitate in doing so until I talked with you further, as we have never finished our discussion on the topic. I was wondering if we could now do so, so that I may relay what I learn back to the INFP list. Kathy W. Harris [This letter led to What We Mean When We Speak of the 'inFp', etc - A Critique of the J/P Designation in the MBTI, which appears in the current issue of the Journal.]

December 9, 1999 Interesting reading! Souvik Chakraborty, India Thank you.

December 8, 1999 Dear Editors, I just stumbled across your website and wanted to say how nice it is. It's not only functional but it's beautiful! I'm a trained practitioner in MBTI and The Birkman and also have had some training in Enneagram (wrote a computerized questionnaire which I haven't published) but most of all I wanted to thank you for bringing these two instruments together. I look forward to exploring your site. Guy S. Thank you. Although it can sometimes be time consuming, we enjoy doing the graphics - and the computer programming as well. We find that both offer valuable respite from the kinds of activity that we end up spending most time on - thinking, writing, and editing. We look forward to hearing more from you in the future. We'd like to know more about your experience with these systems, and what you think about the relationship between MBTI and Enneagram. Have you put your computerized enneagram questionnaire on-line? Thanks for the response. No, I've gotten distracted by other work and I've haven't done any other work on the E'gram. ... I am interested in your work about E'gram and MBTI correlations and I intend to refer your website to the local MBTI Typetalks chat group. They're based in the UK and have an impressive list of researchers, far beyond my comprehension. As an aside, while I respect research into various instruments and their validity and reliability, etc., as a practitioner, my focus is more on the so-what, now what are we going to do results based coaching level. But, you have re-ignited my interest, and I think I'll dig out my E'gram books and start reading again! Guy

December 7, 1999 I will be stopping by a few more times so keep up the good work... Steve Z. Sure thing.

December 6, 1999 Dear Editors, I am a chaplain in a local hospital here in ... NY. I went through the basic stuff on the enneagram a few years ago. I was able through this process do some personal growing, and it helped to put the pieces of my puzzle together quite nicely. I recently mentioned the enneagram to my supervisor and downloaded some info for him. They use the MBTI here, but the article at your site, I forgot the title, was showing how the writer used one as a supplement to the other and did help her in counselling her clients. All in all, I find the enneagram very intriguing to say the very least. Have a fun day, Bob F. That sounds like Pat Wyman. We'd like to hear more about your experiences using the enneagram for personal growth. Do you use it also for counselling?

December 6, 1999 Dear Editors, Towards a Diversity of Psychological Type in Organization: Part 2 is very interesting. I am a crosscultural psychology researcher working on functional pairs and shadows as explanations of crosscultural differences in negotiation practices between China and the US. Neil .A., Ph.D. That's fascinating! Would be interested in knowing more about what you are doing, and also in hearing your thoughts on the subjects that we raised in the diversity paper. Did you happen to catch the informal conversation that John had with Lenore Thomson Bentz on related topics?

December 6, 1999 I am studying personality types as part of my MBA, I can't believe how accurate the MBTI appears to be. If you have any further information you could email to me, it would be appreciated. I shall visit your site on a regular basis. Steve M., ENTP There is the equivalent of over 800 hard-copy pages posted at the site, which includes most (but not all) of what we have to share on this topic. Stay in touch, though. There is more coming.

December 6, 1999 Dear Editors, Have taken the MBTI 2x-- both times I came out w/ 4 types, as I was 0/1 for E/I & N/S, with very strong T & J (both over or near 35-40). Fascinating! Just a mix of all 4, w/ ENTJ predominant but not excessive. All in moderation, & to each his own path. Have taken an E-gram self-test 1x-- came out strong 8 w/ 1 influence. Again, fascinating! We can learn from this information to improve our defects & strive for perfection. Thank you. Sara T. You're welcome.

December 4, 1999 Dear Editors, My interest is in research relating to a paper for a "Leadership" class I am taking for my MBA. This is all very interesting and useful. L.M., ISFJ/ISTJ 6 You might want to check out our paper, Toward a Diversity of Psychological Type. It lists the four types of 'organizational form' that are preferred by the four 'core' MBTI types (ST, SF, NT, NF). With each of these one can associate a style of leadership. We'd call these, respectively - 1) authoritarian leadership, associated with the ST preference for bureaucratic organizational form, which stresses heirarchy and top-down decision-making. Leaders of this type are commonly referred to as 'directors'; benevolent 'philosopher kings' at best, dictators at worst; they hand down the 'laws' by which the group operates. 2) relational leadership, associated with the SF preference for familial forms of organization, which emphasize heirarchal structures based on relationship, and promote social cohesion amongst members. Leaders in this type of organization are modeled on the 'parent' figure in families - the wise elder who is (ideally) 'protective' and educational as well as 'directive' (when necessary). As compared to the ST leader, who hands down explicit directions, the SF leader will prefer to lead 'by good example'. 3) project leadership, associated with the NT preference for 'project management' forms of organization - which are often used in R&D (research and development). An ad hoc team of interdisciplinary experts (each playing a different, relatively 'autonomous' function) - a task force - is put together in order to explore and seek solutions to a particular (often 'scientific') problem. Leaders in this kind of group (which is dedictated to discovery and innovation) tend to be the holder of a 'vision' that is emerging from the group, with which they 'inspire' members and 'coordinate' the individual efforts necessary to achieve a 'breakthrough'. 4) situational leadership, associated with the NF preference for organic-adaptive forms of organization. Insofar as there is 'leadership' in this type of organization, which tends ideally toward a participatory democracy operating according to consensus decision-making, the leadership is temporary and of an 'ad hoc' nature. The leadership 'rotates', depending upon the needs presented by the situation, and the ability of specific individuals to provide what is needed at that point in time. This type of organization is sometimes even described as 'leaderless'. It can indeed be argued that 'leadership' is an ST concept; the NF equivalent might very well be ' stewardship' (a term that has gained currency as a substitute for the term 'leadership' in recent years in contemporary Organizational Management literature). In his or her capacity as steward of the group, the 'leader' is less likely to 'lead', and more likely to act as 'facilitator'. This last form of leadership is the one that personally interests us most. It is the least well understood or appreciated form. When an individual 'leads' in this way it can look to others as if he or she is not leading at all - as if he or she is being passive. Nevertheless, individuals who are expert 'facilitators' turn out to exert quite a lot of influence on the group, but from a position 'in the background', as it were. When one looks closely, one can see that this type of leadership involves a very specific set of interpersonal management skills and organizational competencies that promote what might be called a 'facilitative environment' within the group. A facilitative environment is one which simultaneously optimizes both the individual autonomy of all members AND collaboration between members. The leadership skills that are required to do this are very different from what is required for successful ST leadership (the capacity to concentrate decision-making power in oneself, as leader, and use that power in such a way that ensures that one will retain control of one's priveleged position in the power hierarchy over time).

December 4, 1999 G'day folks I'm interested in the Enneagram as a life process / strategy tool. I did some work with a Gurdieff group over twenty years ago and am being drawn back to it for some reason. I spent my early/middle childhood in Phoenix. Right now I'm working as a Teacher-Librarian in ... Australia. My wife and I are also Reiki teachers ... I am looking for new directions in the near future and am interested in the Enneagram as a methodology of transition. Any suggestions? Looking forward to your response, K.S. We hear that there is going to be a "Frustration and Despair in the Workplace" presentation offered at the 'Relaxation Centre of Queensland' in Brisbane; the presenter will be utilizing material from Helen Palmer's work. There are also various groups in Australia. We'll send you the list when we receive it from our Australian contact.

December , 1999 Dear Editors, Your site is one of the most informative I have seen. I am an ENFP. I spend most of my time researching personality typing. Your site is the only one that touches on things that I've known or wanted to know more about but haven't been able to find until I discovered you. Thank you, I love you guys. You know what level of feeling I'm at. Your article on ESTJ's was fantastic, gutsy and so true. One example of my ESTJ boss is in the last two years I have come up with no less than 15 ideas at our weekly group meeting that he has shot down and than 6 months to a year later he has incorporated every one of them and acts like they were his ideas! If you need any extra input on any type subject please don't hesitate to ask. Do you see the errors in some of Keirsey stuff, what he didn't steel from Myers-Briggs? Thanks for taking me to a new level. I'm sending my love your way, I'm sure you will all feel it. Mike S.

Dec 2, 1999 This looks like a very informative site! Vicki Thanks.

December 2, 1999 Dear Editors, Very interesting information... I'm an iNfp (according to your experimental test) and in Senior Management, so kind of a mismatch, yet successful (although not exactly happy with what I'm doing because of having to use ESTJ functions so much). If there's anything I can do to add to your research, please let me know... I find it fascinating! Kevin T. Will do.

Dec. 2, 1999 Dear Editors, I'm very interested in these topics. Will continue to tap into this site. Jane H. Please do.

Dec. 2, 1999 Dear Editors, I am very interested in the topics discussed at this site. I would like to receive a copy of the PDF file. You can send it to this [email address ommitted]. Thanks in advance. Kind regards, Jerry S. A PDF file for the Journal has not yet been prepared. But we will put you on our list.

Nov. 29, 1999 Dear Editors, Yes, I would be interested in receiving more information. I am researching into personality types of company intranets and am gathering personality theory data to apply to my MBA dissertation material. J.B.

Dear Patricia and John, I am a physician, who has run a private cancer clinic for over ten years. The Hospital I'm associated with is Adventist, two quotations short of being full blown Branch Davidians. Needless to say, they are run by ESTJ's who have risen to the level of their incompetence. I am an ENFP. I have been a harsh critic and whistle blower, defending patient rights and exposing lack of care, dishonesty and lack of real caring for patients and physicians. When I read your work [Toward a Diversity of Psychological Type in Organization], on the uneven representation of types in the organization, I felt that you had just surveyed our dysfunctional hospital. The level of control and fear of new ideas and honest reassessment based on values has become pathological: Surveillance cameras, traps, alteration of medical records, bribes, payoffs. All this to maintain a facade of control and order. I am impressed that the selection of ESTJ types and exclusion of NF's has crippled our hospital when facing the challenge of managed care. Instead of looking at patient need, standards are altered to optimize the organizational endurance, not the community product. When working groups are put together they are selected on the basis of conforming, so they cannot easily create new modes of service to respond to external changes in health care.. In Enemy of the People, the playwright Henrik Ibsen dramatized a similar situation in a small Spa resort where the doctor discovered contamination and the Organization destroyed him rather than respond based on values. In the long run, the values approach may in fact be also the economical approach. I therefore believe that the work you have embarked on is very important to our society. I wish to commend you for it. I have just sold my practice and will focus on writing screenplays and stage plays. Your insights on organizational selection and exclusion of personality types might be helpful in my illustrating the problem, so that it can be seen as indicative of a systemic problem in our society. Thank you again for the stimulating and enlightening articles and your generosity in sharing your ideas on the web. Sincerely, Andrew I., M.D. Thank you. Glad to have presented work that you found personally helpful. We are sorry, but not surprised, to hear about your experience. Although the kind of problems that you describe are not often mentioned in MBTI literature - for various reasons - these difficulties do, unfortunately, appear to take place rather frequently in the workplace. NFs don't need much convincing about this; they easily recognize what we are describing. We wish you the best of luck in your new career as a writer. You should have more freedom in that capacity - although publishing and/or the other institutions that you might as a result become involved in may also present situations that are less than ideal, from the point of view of the NF.

Nov. 27, 1999 Dear Editors, As an African-American INFP, I found the information [about type bias in Toward a Diversity of Psychological Type in Organization] rather frightening. I seem to be a minority member in every since of the word. Myrna Yes, unfortunately that is probably true. I wish it weren't. Maybe there is some consolation to be had in knowing that when one has identified how one differs from others type-wise, one is in a better position to deal with those differences proactively. We've found that many of the INFPs who have read the article express a sense of relief that comes from beginning to understand how some of the friction that they experience in their organization may be a result of the fact that their organizations have forms that are built around the special needs of a personality type different from their own. Once people realize that this is happening, they are relieved from the felt need to blame themselves for what is happening. They also realize that although they are in a minority, they are not completely alone, and learn how to identify other INFPs - inside and outside their organizations - for mutual support. In this way they may begin to feel that what they desire in an organization is not simply 'wrong' - as they were often led to believe by proponents of the prevailing forms of organization would have it. You will surely have a better appreciation than most for the sociological mechanisms that come into play when bias is present, and have probably developed constructive ways of addressing these kinds of threats. You can apply similar strategies to address type-biases, of course; and your experience would be invaluable to others, who are not as wise. We sometimes play with the idea of forming a special email list for discussion of such issues. It would be a handpicked group selected from those who, like yourself, have approached us as a result of the paper, and are interested in mutual support and discussion with other like-minded folks.

Nov 22, 1999 Dear Editors, Congratulations for the excellent web page, and also the excellent consistency of information. It has completed the information received on a recent course in Personal Relantioship - Psychological Types. Fabio Fontana Great. Glad to be of help.

Nov. 18, 1999 Dear Editors, Thanks for sharing these very rich resources. Ken Miller, ph.d. You are welcome.

Nov. 16, 1999 Dear Editors, I have this question. One of the four functions is intuition (N). But what do we mean by this? Outside the area of personality-typing, I read that intuition most of the time is described as a specific source of information or an internal source of knowlegde ("knowing from within" or "the sixth sense" or "knowing without knowing how you know"). Within the MBTI however it seems that N means something like "being able to see the big picture" or "being able to see all the consequences" or "being able to see the (complex) relations between elements" or "being able to see the whole forest instead of just the seperate trees". Could you explain this to me? Johan Apperloo Your question is a very important one. The concept of 'intuition' may be the least well understood of the four Jungian 'functions'. The word 'intuition' has a long history and originally had a more profound religious or spiritual meaning. Intuition was thought to involve a direct, unmediated apprehension of 'supreme' being (ie, God). This 'ultimate' being was, of course, considered to be 'perfect', in the sense of 'whole'. To see things from the point of view of God would be to be without the limits of a particular perspective - it would be like seeing things from all sides at once. In the mystical traditions which speak about such direct experiences it is likened to an 'undifferentiated' state which not only transcends subject and object, but also transcends the distinction between 'figure' and 'ground'. This is another way of saying that 'God' is not an ordinary 'thing', with attributes and features. Interestingly, this definition of 'intuition' and the other one that you mention - which links it to 'supernatural knowledge', are linked, in a way that we have tried to build into our '5 levels of development of the intuitive function' (which you can find a synopsis of above. According to the Patanjali sutras (which describes the highest type of yoga - raja, or 'mental' yoga) if, by meditating on a particular object one goes into the undifferentiated 'holistic' states (associated with higher level intuition), one will gain extra-sensory knowledge of that object (which are akin to the 'hunches' that are associated with lower level 'intuition'). So in this way higher levels of intuition, as you can see, are connected with lower. At some point we will post some of the materials that we have previously written about the five levels of the intuitive function, at http://tap3x.net/ENSEMBLE.