So, this is something that occurred to me when I was listening to an interview with Tuhon Bill McGrath where he discussed different personality and learning styles.
I've noticed my own strengths and challenges with regards to learning and understanding in Martial Arts, and I've started to put them in the context of Carl Jung's psychological functions/types.
Many of you may be familiar with the Myer's Briggs Personality Types (MBTI). This test is not exactly scientific, but is based on the scientific work of Carl Jung, in which Jung identifies four major psychological functions: Thinking (T), Feeling (F), Intuition (N) and Sensing (S), with each function being either introverted or extroverted.
For example, a person who is an Extroverted Thinker (Te) primarily orients their thinking towards solving problems in the external world -- that is, to say, to enact upon the external world.
A person who is an Introverted Thinker (Ti) primarily orients their thinking inwardly, in order to understand the nature of things either external or internal. This is not however to say that Introverted Thinking (Ti) does not manifest in the real world; the Scientist, but also the Architect is an Archtype of this sort of thinking. It is best defined as thinking with regards to "The Nature of Things" versus "The Result of Things"
So someone strong in Extroverted Thinking (Te) might be an excellent Entrepreneur, Businessman, or Salesperson. Or perhaps a competitive Sportsman or such. Basically, anyone who primarily is interested in applying things externally.
Conversely, someone strong in Introverted Thinking (Ti) might lean more towards Science, Academia, or Philosophy. They might be a better Investor than Businessman, or be more concerned with their internal development as a person, or the development of their system, rather than just the application of it.
The same is true for Feeling, Sensing, and Intuition, and we all use a mix of both introverted and extroverted functions, just with a bias towards some over others.
For example, I am an INTP. My dominant psychological functions, in order of strongest, to least, are:
1. Introverted Thinking (Ti)
2. Extroverted Intuition (Ne)
3. Introverted Sensing (Si)
4. Extroverted Feeling (Fe)
This leaves me with both some strengths and challenges when learning Martial Arts, and this depends somewhat on how the art is taught.
For example, with Ti, I tend to be more concerned with my mastery and understanding of a given art than with using it competitively. I do enjoy sparring, but only as a way to explore and test what I know, and I much prefer to spar with specific rule-sets geared towards learning, developing, or exploring the art. I like to try out unfair situations, such as multiple attackers against one, mismatched weapons, or experimenting with using certain elements of technique or footwork in creative or unconventional ways. I don't mind losing, and don't really concern myself with winning -- I just want to explore and practice or test out certain things.
A preference for Ne (Extroverted Intuition) means that I tend to make connections and apply externally what I know (Ti) and have "programmed" my body to do (Si). This tends to help a lot with understanding, comparing, and relating certain techniques to one another, and recognizing when to use one or the other. Basically, it is about exploring what you know consciously. This is the function that I primarily rely on to apply what I know (Ti, Si) externally. I'm good at consciously recognizing opportunities to apply something, when I'm not applying it automatically/reflexively via Si, and this function generally helps me to gain a strong understanding of the nature of things (when combined with Ti).
Si (Introverted Sensing) is about internalizing information, including physical habit. I'm very, very good at programming my habits and movement (something that I do consciously via Ti (thinking/reflecting) and Ne (connecting the dots). So I tend to benefit a lot from solo practice, both of more formal forms, and also of more free practice where I explore the formal motions with Ne (Extroverted Intuition) and attempt to make them more natural, refined, and applicable to real life. Basically, in short, I consciously build habits which tend to come out in application exactly as I practice. A lot of people do forms differently from how they actually practice/apply things, but for me, even if I want to do something different, my body tends to automatically do what I've practice solo, even down to pretty minute details. As such, I often find benefit from making very minor tweaks to the forms that I practice.
All of these come with major drawbacks too, though.
Because my thinking is Introverted (Ti), when I am in "Thinking Mode" -- esp when learning, I tend to think to the neglect of all else. You can't be in the moment while also thinking internally. It's not possible. So I tend to appear extremely incompetent when I'm learning things which require a great deal of "thinking" and I can't just be on autopilot with Si/Ne. People are occasionally surprised at the difference in competence between when I am learning and when I am freely applying what I know.
Ne is pretty useful in terms of Martial Arts. I can't think of any argument against it over Ni, and it's kind of what I rely on the most... To the extent that I am "in the moment", it is via extroverted intuition as opposed to extroverted sensing. I am not as situationally aware as someone strong in extroverted sensing, so to the extent that situational awareness is important, it is more because I consciously intuit, rather than sense.
A preference for Si over Se makes it very difficult for me to be fully in the moment while paying attention to details, sequences, or basically anything that I have not already programmed myself to do automatically. This is by far my biggest challenge when learning any art. I tend to want to just do whatever comes out naturally, and if you tell me to do "X, then Y, then Z, then A" and it's not something that I've specifically programmed my body to do, I screw up. A LOT. Really a lot. This is especially true of arbitrary patterns (for which no contextual framework exists to aide memory.) First, I have an unnaturally hard time remembering the sequence, and an even harder time getting my body to do that instead of what it wants to do instead. What's worse is, after class, I probably won't remember the sequence, the numbers, and all the details. So I had better have a video of someone doing it correctly so that I can program my body to do it when I have the opportunity to slow way, way, way down. I often have to go painfully slow to first see, and then remember everything, and can only do it after going through the motions many times myself and building a new habit. This also makes it somewhat more challenging than usual for me to practice multiple martial arts at once, as my habits tend to conflict with one another, especially as it applies to things like footwork and body mechanics.
Basically, I have a really hard time following what's going on when someone demonstrates a technique, and an even harder time doing it for the first (many number) of times. It's only if I have something to reference and can work on it at home, alone, that I finally get it all. It's incredibly important for me to take video or notes and practice solo.
Given all this description, I tend to be naturally more proficient at arts like Kali Ilustrisimo or Wing Chun, where there's not a whole lot to remember, and everything is very instinctual and nuanced. You just respond appropriately to a given attack instinctively depending on all kinds of things, from the angle that it comes in on, to the force that you get, to the position of your hands. Famously, Tatang Ilustrisimo didn't really have a formalized system per-se, and just reacted instinctively given what he knew, and based on nuanced differences in angle, range, timing, pressure, feeling, and positioning. As such, the teaching style, at least in so far as I have been exposed to it, is less rigid and far more natural and free flowing than many more structured arts. This makes it very easy for me to learn.
On the other hand, and complete opposite, are arts like Modern Arnis. Everything is scripted and there are so many rigid sequences and patterns, many of which are arbitrary and therefore really hard for me to remember. At my Arnis club, I do so many different combination of Sinawali's and all of the drills are heavily scripted and technique oriented. There are tons of sequences to learn and you're not really supposed to deviate much, at least not at the level we're practicing. This makes it somewhat difficult for me to follow and gain a functional understanding of, as I have to "explore" in a much more free and less scripted manner (but still low pressure -- not necessarily sparring) to really get a sense of what I'm doing exactly and how to apply it. It is, however, a really good art to study to get an overview of all of the pieces, almost like a dictionary: I've learned a lot about specific techniques, sinawali's, and disarms, etc... even if they always want to come out in some order other than what they're supposed to. It's like a very good dictionary.
Pekiti Tirsia is somewhat in the middle. There is an absolutely massive amount of material which is a huge burden in terms of memory and a lot of sequences of technique -- especially for someone lacking in Extroverted Sensing. But there's a lot of bigger picture / conceptual stuff as well, and the sequences that do exist impress me quite a bit as they answer a lot of my questions about real world application (how to tactically enter, angle off, and put yourself in an advantageous position to set up / bait / enter / follow up / counter / recounter / what have you). When I understand the purpose and application, things are less arbitrary in my mind, and I remember and appreciate them better. As such, I am the kind of person who needs to start writing before I can remember all of the ABC's, as odd as that may sound.
Anyway, that's my personal experience and insight. I'm not sure how many here know that much about the psychological functions themselves, but whether you do or you don't, I'd love to hear your experiences and insight as to how you learn, what you find difficult or easy, and how that changes between different arts. Do you notice similar or contrasting points with anything I've mentioned here? And, if you've taken the MBTI, what psychological type do you appear to be?
I've noticed my own strengths and challenges with regards to learning and understanding in Martial Arts, and I've started to put them in the context of Carl Jung's psychological functions/types.
Many of you may be familiar with the Myer's Briggs Personality Types (MBTI). This test is not exactly scientific, but is based on the scientific work of Carl Jung, in which Jung identifies four major psychological functions: Thinking (T), Feeling (F), Intuition (N) and Sensing (S), with each function being either introverted or extroverted.
For example, a person who is an Extroverted Thinker (Te) primarily orients their thinking towards solving problems in the external world -- that is, to say, to enact upon the external world.
A person who is an Introverted Thinker (Ti) primarily orients their thinking inwardly, in order to understand the nature of things either external or internal. This is not however to say that Introverted Thinking (Ti) does not manifest in the real world; the Scientist, but also the Architect is an Archtype of this sort of thinking. It is best defined as thinking with regards to "The Nature of Things" versus "The Result of Things"
So someone strong in Extroverted Thinking (Te) might be an excellent Entrepreneur, Businessman, or Salesperson. Or perhaps a competitive Sportsman or such. Basically, anyone who primarily is interested in applying things externally.
Conversely, someone strong in Introverted Thinking (Ti) might lean more towards Science, Academia, or Philosophy. They might be a better Investor than Businessman, or be more concerned with their internal development as a person, or the development of their system, rather than just the application of it.
The same is true for Feeling, Sensing, and Intuition, and we all use a mix of both introverted and extroverted functions, just with a bias towards some over others.
For example, I am an INTP. My dominant psychological functions, in order of strongest, to least, are:
1. Introverted Thinking (Ti)
2. Extroverted Intuition (Ne)
3. Introverted Sensing (Si)
4. Extroverted Feeling (Fe)
This leaves me with both some strengths and challenges when learning Martial Arts, and this depends somewhat on how the art is taught.
For example, with Ti, I tend to be more concerned with my mastery and understanding of a given art than with using it competitively. I do enjoy sparring, but only as a way to explore and test what I know, and I much prefer to spar with specific rule-sets geared towards learning, developing, or exploring the art. I like to try out unfair situations, such as multiple attackers against one, mismatched weapons, or experimenting with using certain elements of technique or footwork in creative or unconventional ways. I don't mind losing, and don't really concern myself with winning -- I just want to explore and practice or test out certain things.
A preference for Ne (Extroverted Intuition) means that I tend to make connections and apply externally what I know (Ti) and have "programmed" my body to do (Si). This tends to help a lot with understanding, comparing, and relating certain techniques to one another, and recognizing when to use one or the other. Basically, it is about exploring what you know consciously. This is the function that I primarily rely on to apply what I know (Ti, Si) externally. I'm good at consciously recognizing opportunities to apply something, when I'm not applying it automatically/reflexively via Si, and this function generally helps me to gain a strong understanding of the nature of things (when combined with Ti).
Si (Introverted Sensing) is about internalizing information, including physical habit. I'm very, very good at programming my habits and movement (something that I do consciously via Ti (thinking/reflecting) and Ne (connecting the dots). So I tend to benefit a lot from solo practice, both of more formal forms, and also of more free practice where I explore the formal motions with Ne (Extroverted Intuition) and attempt to make them more natural, refined, and applicable to real life. Basically, in short, I consciously build habits which tend to come out in application exactly as I practice. A lot of people do forms differently from how they actually practice/apply things, but for me, even if I want to do something different, my body tends to automatically do what I've practice solo, even down to pretty minute details. As such, I often find benefit from making very minor tweaks to the forms that I practice.
All of these come with major drawbacks too, though.
Because my thinking is Introverted (Ti), when I am in "Thinking Mode" -- esp when learning, I tend to think to the neglect of all else. You can't be in the moment while also thinking internally. It's not possible. So I tend to appear extremely incompetent when I'm learning things which require a great deal of "thinking" and I can't just be on autopilot with Si/Ne. People are occasionally surprised at the difference in competence between when I am learning and when I am freely applying what I know.
Ne is pretty useful in terms of Martial Arts. I can't think of any argument against it over Ni, and it's kind of what I rely on the most... To the extent that I am "in the moment", it is via extroverted intuition as opposed to extroverted sensing. I am not as situationally aware as someone strong in extroverted sensing, so to the extent that situational awareness is important, it is more because I consciously intuit, rather than sense.
A preference for Si over Se makes it very difficult for me to be fully in the moment while paying attention to details, sequences, or basically anything that I have not already programmed myself to do automatically. This is by far my biggest challenge when learning any art. I tend to want to just do whatever comes out naturally, and if you tell me to do "X, then Y, then Z, then A" and it's not something that I've specifically programmed my body to do, I screw up. A LOT. Really a lot. This is especially true of arbitrary patterns (for which no contextual framework exists to aide memory.) First, I have an unnaturally hard time remembering the sequence, and an even harder time getting my body to do that instead of what it wants to do instead. What's worse is, after class, I probably won't remember the sequence, the numbers, and all the details. So I had better have a video of someone doing it correctly so that I can program my body to do it when I have the opportunity to slow way, way, way down. I often have to go painfully slow to first see, and then remember everything, and can only do it after going through the motions many times myself and building a new habit. This also makes it somewhat more challenging than usual for me to practice multiple martial arts at once, as my habits tend to conflict with one another, especially as it applies to things like footwork and body mechanics.
Basically, I have a really hard time following what's going on when someone demonstrates a technique, and an even harder time doing it for the first (many number) of times. It's only if I have something to reference and can work on it at home, alone, that I finally get it all. It's incredibly important for me to take video or notes and practice solo.
Given all this description, I tend to be naturally more proficient at arts like Kali Ilustrisimo or Wing Chun, where there's not a whole lot to remember, and everything is very instinctual and nuanced. You just respond appropriately to a given attack instinctively depending on all kinds of things, from the angle that it comes in on, to the force that you get, to the position of your hands. Famously, Tatang Ilustrisimo didn't really have a formalized system per-se, and just reacted instinctively given what he knew, and based on nuanced differences in angle, range, timing, pressure, feeling, and positioning. As such, the teaching style, at least in so far as I have been exposed to it, is less rigid and far more natural and free flowing than many more structured arts. This makes it very easy for me to learn.
On the other hand, and complete opposite, are arts like Modern Arnis. Everything is scripted and there are so many rigid sequences and patterns, many of which are arbitrary and therefore really hard for me to remember. At my Arnis club, I do so many different combination of Sinawali's and all of the drills are heavily scripted and technique oriented. There are tons of sequences to learn and you're not really supposed to deviate much, at least not at the level we're practicing. This makes it somewhat difficult for me to follow and gain a functional understanding of, as I have to "explore" in a much more free and less scripted manner (but still low pressure -- not necessarily sparring) to really get a sense of what I'm doing exactly and how to apply it. It is, however, a really good art to study to get an overview of all of the pieces, almost like a dictionary: I've learned a lot about specific techniques, sinawali's, and disarms, etc... even if they always want to come out in some order other than what they're supposed to. It's like a very good dictionary.
Pekiti Tirsia is somewhat in the middle. There is an absolutely massive amount of material which is a huge burden in terms of memory and a lot of sequences of technique -- especially for someone lacking in Extroverted Sensing. But there's a lot of bigger picture / conceptual stuff as well, and the sequences that do exist impress me quite a bit as they answer a lot of my questions about real world application (how to tactically enter, angle off, and put yourself in an advantageous position to set up / bait / enter / follow up / counter / recounter / what have you). When I understand the purpose and application, things are less arbitrary in my mind, and I remember and appreciate them better. As such, I am the kind of person who needs to start writing before I can remember all of the ABC's, as odd as that may sound.
Anyway, that's my personal experience and insight. I'm not sure how many here know that much about the psychological functions themselves, but whether you do or you don't, I'd love to hear your experiences and insight as to how you learn, what you find difficult or easy, and how that changes between different arts. Do you notice similar or contrasting points with anything I've mentioned here? And, if you've taken the MBTI, what psychological type do you appear to be?
Last edited: