INTP Forum  

Go Back   INTP Forum > Within > MBTI & Typology

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 6th-January-2017, 11:57 AM   #1
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Question Self typing help, please!

Hello, possibly fellow INTPs! I say this because I'm utterly unsure of my MBTI type. I've heard that the tests are fairly inaccurate, so I decided to try and do a self-typing instead, at which point I realised that I'm a mixture of a number of types.

This is probably going to seem weird, but the two types I identify the most with are ISFP and INTP. Yes, yes, I know. They're almost on opposite ends of the personality spectrum. But hear (or read) me out.

I'm definitely into art. Sketching out my imagination, or doodling random things is one of my favourite pastimes. BUT at the same time, when I'm alone or in a quiet setting, I find myself musing deep concepts, or even my own thoughts. I often contemplate the mysteries of the universe, and such. I often forget where I am as I travel deep into my sea of thoughts. But at other moments, I find myself focused on an unusual bird. (I'm into bird-watching too.)

However, the one part of the INFP type description that appealed to me was the part which described their love for writing, which I also share.

I don't know if this helps, but when I initially heard about the MBTI system(thanks, MatPat!), I really wanted to be an Intuitive (N), but now, my views have changed, and I've realised the uniqueness of Sensors too.

Thanks!
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 02:05 PM   #2
nanook
a scream in a vortex
 
nanook's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: germany
Posts: 1,841
windows_98_nt_2000firefox
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

My story of confusion is somewhat similar and has not ended. But i don't want to bomb this thread with a trillion of historical thoughts about myself.

I don't know if i could help you or would confuse you more - it depends on how wrong my current view of things is.

I dare to share at least one of my current hypotheses.

When it comes to writing, INFP would rather write a real story, than philosophy or psychoanalysis. in reading they would enjoy autobiographies and other personality based fiction, such as romance or crime, over science fiction, fantasy, adventure or factual science books. INTP would prefer the latter.

(@all: my current opinion is that i am very much not INFP, which is based on the acute perception that it is my mother who is the INFP in my world of comparative references)

you could hear a "second opinion" (to mbti) by studying socionic profiles, such as those of
http://www.socionics.com/prof/prof.htm
or
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...ikisocion_home

their descriptions are very different.

IMPORTANT: you must know their introverted types are labeled differently, J and P have opposite meaning.
__________________
synthesis achieved
ready for abduction
Spoiler:

I'm some other type until proven INTP.

nanook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 02:59 PM   #3
JimJambones
sPaCe CaDeT
 
JimJambones's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 402
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Art, science, humanities, fantasy, sci-fi, horror, anything expansive and exploratory is NTP to the core. The difference between NTP and NFP types is that NFPs seem no need justify their imaginations. NTPs are pretty logical artists and everything we do has either a scientific, philosophic bent, and intellectual in a very reasonable,, logical way. Those are my observations anyways.
JimJambones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 04:18 PM   #4
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Okay, hold up. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but aren't INFPs the one really into fantasy and the like? I mean, JRR Tolkein himself was an INFP.

Those links you added were very interesting! If I am to go by the accuracy of socionics, then that would definitely NOT make me an ISFP. I don't really 'put myself out there', per se. And especially with regard to the conversation distance, I get uncomfortable standing too close to anyone. Well, guess I'll have to just keep going.. Thanks a lot though!
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 04:26 PM   #5
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

The only thing is that at some moments I feel like an intuitive, while at other times, I feel like a sensor. There are times where I'll quickly connect something familiar to something else, but on the other hand, I'll notice minute and frankly unnecessary details.

Also, I have an ENTP friend, and I've noticed how he makes very fast and unusual connections between things and thinks differently, while, since I suspect myself of being an INTP, the connections I make are slower, and my thought process is more of a slow, thinking, musing type. Is this true for all INTPs? Do ENTPs exercise their Ni more than INTPs exercise their Ne because they are dominant and auxiliary functions respectively?

Last edited by The Flycatcher; 6th-January-2017 at 04:27 PM. Reason: Grammatical error
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 04:35 PM   #6
JimJambones
sPaCe CaDeT
 
JimJambones's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 402
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Okay, hold up. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but aren't INFPs the one really into fantasy and the like? I mean, JRR Tolkein himself was an INFP.

Those links you added were very interesting! If I am to go by the accuracy of socionics, then that would definitely NOT make me an ISFP. I don't really 'put myself out there', per se. And especially with regard to the conversation distance, I get uncomfortable standing too close to anyone. Well, guess I'll have to just keep going.. Thanks a lot though!
I would say it is more accurate to say intuitives in general are more likely to enjoy fantasy than sensors. With that said, I think NTs tend more toward sci-fi and NFs toward medieval romanticizing and other fluffernutters, but I think it depends on the individual and their interests and their motivations for watching/reading.

I think NTs can enjoy Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings too! There is more a suspension of reason though, like okay this is fantasy, lets enjoy even though this could never happen. Magic in not real to an NT, but NF fluff romanticizes magic and wishes it were true or something. Harry Potter has a lot of that, like "Lets be magical and imaginative. Fairies are real if you just believe!!!!!" and all that crap.
JimJambones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 04:52 PM   #7
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Yeah.. I'm a HUGE fan of fantasy. Lord of the Rings, Wheel of Time, David Gemmell, I love all of it!

Also, since you're an NT, could you tell me this? Have you ever felt like a sensor? Perhaps you had observed an inconspicuous detail somewhere?
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 05:02 PM   #8
JimJambones
sPaCe CaDeT
 
JimJambones's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 402
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Yeah.. I'm a HUGE fan of fantasy. Lord of the Rings, Wheel of Time, David Gemmell, I love all of it!

Also, since you're an NT, could you tell me this? Have you ever felt like a sensor? Perhaps you had observed an inconspicuous detail somewhere?
Yup. I think it's just the way type is framed within MBTI. Intuitives use sensing, it is just underutilized, mostly because your mind is on more abstract, conceptual things. Sure you can have fixations or abilities that require Si or Se. They may be hobbies or a job that require it, or needed for relationships. I need some sort of sensory activity and enjoy it to some extent, I just get really, really bored over time. Besides, none of us can obtain knowledge about the world without observation and sensory processing anyways.
JimJambones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 05:10 PM   #9
JimJambones
sPaCe CaDeT
 
JimJambones's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 402
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

I often can't see things that are right in front of me if that says anything about my sensory processing abilities
JimJambones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 05:15 PM   #10
zerkalo
.
 
zerkalo's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: the Purgatory
Posts: 1,520
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
but aren't INFPs the one really into fantasy and the like?
nope
thats what the stereotype says
but i dont find it to be true, i think what nanook said was pretty spot on. Fi prioritizes character depth and closure above everything else. it just so happens that this type of thing is not so common in fantasy or science fiction as their focus tends on flow of events or setting the mood
__________________
Have read little and understood less.
zerkalo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 06:27 PM   #11
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

You seem to be a Ti user. You have traits that I would associate with TPs and FJs. I'm still not certain about your perceiving functions/letters.
Could you describe something for me? Your desk maybe, or the concept of happiness, or how your thought process works. Anything will do. The more the merrier.
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 10:15 PM   #12
Artsu Tharaz
Resident Resident
 
Artsu Tharaz's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: /~\
Posts: 2,502
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Idk if it's quite your reasoning, but being into art and the likes doesn't make you ISFP or similar to ISFP. Yeah there is a degree of emotional expression in much of art, and certain forms of art can be quite physical, but there's going to be plenty of INTPs into art.

I'm not really getting Fi vibes from what you've said so far.

Quote:
I don't know if this helps, but when I initially heard about the MBTI system(thanks, MatPat!), I really wanted to be an Intuitive (N), but now, my views have changed, and I've realised the uniqueness of Sensors too.
Here you're speaking of something concrete - something that happened - but it is something which happened subjectively, "I really wanted to...", "my views...", which makes me think Si.

To contrast I might say something like "initially I typed as an intuitive, but then changed to sensor, and now I'm unsure" - see how it's about me (the subject) but is objective, in that it's "I did..." such and such.

Quote:
Also, I have an ENTP friend, and I've noticed how he makes very fast and unusual connections between things and thinks differently, while, since I suspect myself of being an INTP, the connections I make are slower, and my thought process is more of a slow, thinking, musing type. Is this true for all INTPs? Do ENTPs exercise their Ni more than INTPs exercise their Ne because they are dominant and auxiliary functions respectively?
Here you yourself are making connections - noting patterns. The things you're observing aren't really things you can physically observe, but rather are patterns that form over time from a number of observations, and is objective in nature "he tends to do this and this, and I tend to do this", plus you've made some inquiries suggesting curiousity. This makes me think this paragraph shows Ne.

Furthermore, the way in which you're drawing comparisons between yourself and another strikes me as Si+Fe. Probably your Ti is all through your posts, but I've become so accustomed to it on this forum that it doesn't stand out as much. Probably the intellectual manner in which you draw the comparison suggests that the Si+Fe aspect is lower down.
Artsu Tharaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 11:30 PM   #13
QuickTwist
Man of few words
 
QuickTwist's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The keen war front.
Posts: 5,230
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by nanook View Post
My story of confusion is somewhat similar and has not ended. But i don't want to bomb this thread with a trillion of historical thoughts about myself.

I don't know if i could help you or would confuse you more - it depends on how wrong my current view of things is.

I dare to share at least one of my current hypotheses.

When it comes to writing, INFP would rather write a real story, than philosophy or psychoanalysis. in reading they would enjoy autobiographies and other personality based fiction, such as romance or crime, over science fiction, fantasy, adventure or factual science books. INTP would prefer the latter.

(@all: my current opinion is that i am very much not INFP, which is based on the acute perception that it is my mother who is the INFP in my world of comparative references)

you could hear a "second opinion" (to mbti) by studying socionic profiles, such as those of
http://www.socionics.com/prof/prof.htm
or
http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.p...ikisocion_home

their descriptions are very different.

IMPORTANT: you must know their introverted types are labeled differently, J and P have opposite meaning.
I think you are going through something that is weighing on your psyche from this post you made. Any truth in that?
__________________
QuickTwist is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 6th-January-2017, 11:34 PM   #14
Artsu Tharaz
Resident Resident
 
Artsu Tharaz's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: /~\
Posts: 2,502
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by nanook
@all: my current opinion is that i am very much not INFP
For what it's worth, your display pic (I assume it's you) reminds me of how I (INFJ) look when I'm in a more INFP-ish mood, e.g. when with my INFP friend.

Quote:
IMPORTANT: you must know their introverted types are labeled differently, J and P have opposite meaning.
To elaborate: it is because MBTI judges J vs P based on how you interact with the external world, whereas socionics looks at your primary mode of cognition whether it is externally based or not.
Artsu Tharaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th-January-2017, 02:21 AM   #15
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

In response to Ucenna's query, I would definitely consider myself a perceiving type. My desk is a mess of random stuff which I never put in their proper places. The only thing I even try to arrange regularly is an action figure of Yoda which falls occasionally. As for schedules and timetables, I can't make them, and even if I manage to do that, I would never stick to them.
Artsu Tharaz, thanks for the extremely detailed Analysis. You seem to be an NT type, for sure! If your analysis is correct, then I am predominantly a Ti user. However, I wouldn't consider myself only a thinking type. I do feel emotional, but at the same time, not to the extent to which I've read INFPs or ISFPs feel emotional. Not nearly that much. Could that be a case of a slightly developed Fe?
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th-January-2017, 03:36 AM   #16
Artsu Tharaz
Resident Resident
 
Artsu Tharaz's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: /~\
Posts: 2,502
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Artsu Tharaz, thanks for the extremely detailed Analysis. You seem to be an NT type, for sure! If your analysis is correct, then I am predominantly a Ti user. However, I wouldn't consider myself only a thinking type. I do feel emotional, but at the same time, not to the extent to which I've read INFPs or ISFPs feel emotional. Not nearly that much. Could that be a case of a slightly developed Fe?
No worries. Actually, I'm an INFJ :P But I think I probably use more Ti than Fe when I'm on this forum (and quite low Fe in general relative to other Fe types, since I'm very introverted)

Feeling isn't just about emotion; everyone can be emotional, and Feeling is a broader class of phenomena. It's like... basing decisions off of the way something "feels", and Feeling types also tend to be very people focused. Fi is more focused on the self as a person, and Fe is more focused on others. So, for example, by drawing my attention towards you and helping you out by analysing your personality, I am showing Fe motivation.

I wouldn't say your emotionality is due to Fe. Fe would be for example showing expressions of warmth towards others. I have an INTP friend who usually seems somewhat cold to others, but occassionally will light up a bit and pay someone a compliment and express feelings of friendship. So for example, when you said "Artsu Tharaz, thanks for the extremely detailed Analysis. You seem to be an NT type, for sure!" this would be an example of Fe.
Artsu Tharaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th-January-2017, 05:37 AM   #17
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Firstly, there a two core trains of thought:
Dichotomies:
I v E
S v N
F v T
J v N

Functions:
Fe, Te, Ti, Fi, Ne, Se, Ni, Si
Etc

They're mutually exclusive. I prefer functions personally, they're more based on theory. I like theory.

Also, while reading the functions, keep in mind everyone uses both to an extent. Which do you think you use more of.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artsu Tharaz View Post
Here you're speaking of something concrete - something that happened - but it is something which happened subjectively, "I really wanted to...", "my views...", which makes me think Si.

To contrast I might say something like "initially I typed as an intuitive, but then changed to sensor, and now I'm unsure" - see how it's about me (the subject) but is objective, in that it's "I did..." such and such.
and

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artsu Tharaz View Post
Here you yourself are making connections - noting patterns. The things you're observing aren't really things you can physically observe, but rather are patterns that form over time from a number of observations, and is objective in nature "he tends to do this and this, and I tend to do this", plus you've made some inquiries suggesting curiousity. This makes me think this paragraph shows Ne.

Furthermore, the way in which you're drawing comparisons between yourself and another strikes me as Si+Fe.
I don't know about this. I was actually leaning towards Se-Ni myself.
Se and Ne are both external functions they take in information and give it to Ni and Si respectively for processing.


Se takes in the physical world, Ni finds and remembers the patterns.

Ne takes in an impression* of the world, Si finds the objects and associates that impression with them.

*Not a Ne user, cannot compute. Basically it takes in it's response to the world and compiles it into an impression. It takes in things like happiness or disappointment and compiles it into an impression.


Which would you say sounds more like you, @The Flycatcher?

@Artsu Tharaz, I still can't decide. I'm leaning towards Pe before Pi, but it could really go either way with Se or Ne.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
In response to Ucenna's query, I would definitely consider myself a perceiving type. My desk is a mess of random stuff which I never put in their proper places. The only thing I even try to arrange regularly is an action figure of Yoda which falls occasionally. As for schedules and timetables, I can't make them, and even if I manage to do that, I would never stick to them.
I'm leaning towards aux Pe. But before settling on that, want to analyze something else? Anything. Dissect whatever you feel like. This word, that thought, that car down the street.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Artsu Tharaz, thanks for the extremely detailed Analysis. You seem to be an NT type, for sure! If your analysis is correct, then I am predominantly a Ti user. However, I wouldn't consider myself only a thinking type. I do feel emotional, but at the same time, not to the extent to which I've read INFPs or ISFPs feel emotional. Not nearly that much. Could that be a case of a slightly developed Fe?
I'd say yes. Fi and Fe are very subtle distinct. The easier way I can think of describing it is having your heart on the inside rather than the outside. I'm a Fe aux, and being around someone else who is crying makes me want to cry for them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artsu Tharaz View Post
No worries. Actually, I'm an INFJ :P But I think I probably use more Ti than Fe when I'm on this forum (and quite low Fe in general relative to other Fe types, since I'm very introverted)
I've noticed this phenomena too! Seems that when I'm introverting I feel more like a Ti. But toss me in a crowd... Fe dives forward.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Artsu Tharaz View Post
Feeling isn't just about emotion; everyone can be emotional, and Feeling is a broader class of phenomena. It's like... basing decisions off of the way something "feels", and Feeling types also tend to be very people focused. Fi is more focused on the self as a person, and Fe is more focused on others. So, for example, by drawing my attention towards you and helping you out by analysing your personality, I am showing Fe motivation.

I wouldn't say your emotionality is due to Fe. Fe would be for example showing expressions of warmth towards others. I have an INTP friend who usually seems somewhat cold to others, but occassionally will light up a bit and pay someone a compliment and express feelings of friendship. So for example, when you said "Artsu Tharaz, thanks for the extremely detailed Analysis. You seem to be an NT type, for sure!" this would be an example of Fe.
Well put. (Fe surfaces)

(Fe dives below the surface)
I really can't decide. I'm torn between ISTP and INTP.
You said your friend was an ENTP and that he thinks differentish than you. How differently would you say?
Also you're a LOTRs fan? I love it. "Ucenna" is actually an elvish word. What's your favorite thing about it? Actually, I don't think I can point to one thing myself. New question: What do you like about it?
For me, it's a masterpiece. There's so much beauty. And the characters. Everyone tries so hard to do the right thing. Except For do at the end, but who can blame him? Gollum. I wanted him to be redeemed so badly. And he almost was...
*drifts off into fantasy*
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th-January-2017, 06:20 AM   #18
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

@Ucenna, well, you wanted me to analyze something... , this isn't exactly much of an analysis, but yesterday, this guy in class pointed out that another guy (my ENTP friend) writes his zeroes clockwise, and observed how weird it was. Well, when I tried it, I realised that that's how I've been doing it too for years, without ever knowing it! We then asked a few other people to write their zeroes, and they all wrote it counter-clockwise. Well, this got me thinking. I did some research, and figured out that apparently lefties predominantly write their zeroes clockwise, while right-handed people go counter-clockwise. I'm right-handed, but somehow, this made sense. I've always been told by people that when I perform certain activities, it's (unconsciously) with my left hand. For example, dealing cards. Also, I would consider myself fairly dexterous, as I'm good at sketching. And strangely enough, the ENTP guy is good with his hands too! He's really good at Origami and working with paper in general.
Also, speaking of my friend, I would consider our thinking the same in many aspects. For example, we both have long discussions on EXTREMELY silly topics. For instance, we once wondered what it would be like if our Chemistry teacher's thoughts were projected out, as though in a movie.
Where we differ.. well, he really puts his thoughts out there. Whatever he thinks of, he just says it. Be it insulting someone, thinking of a witty retort, whatever. Sometimes, his mind works a little differently. It's hard to explain unless it's been witnessed. I feel like his mind just works faster in general, but on the flip side, he doesn't really consider things properly, which might explain why he makes several careless errors in math, or stupid spelling mistakes in any subject, even if he knew how to solve the problem or spell the word, respectively. On the other hand, I have to be sure of what I thought of before projecting it, either in speech or on paper. This leads to me sometimes wasting time in tests, and later regretting it.
As for ISTP, I've read the profiles, as I've considered it multiple times, but I've never thought of myself as so stoic or practical. I've identified with quite a few INTP characteristics, though not all, the most relatable one being that there are thoughts clearly formed in my head, but as I say them, they come out, well, deformed, so to speak.
LOTR.. I've only read the series once, but it was enough for me to fall in love with it. What I like about it.. just the entire fantasy atmosphere. I always thought of it as an escape for me. I would come back home after a bad day, and just wait to escape into that world. It was so comforting, yet magical.. I find it hard to explain what I feel. And it's the same for me for all fantasy series too! Also, as a side note, my favourite character in LOTR was Sam, because, despite his extreme harshness towards Gollum, he was the unsung hero of it all. He fought off Shelob (what an amazing moment), and even carried Frodo up Mount Doom! What can I say, I was extremely depressed at the ending of the series. Well, at least I still have The Silmarillion to read!
Well, that turned out longer than I expected..
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th-January-2017, 07:19 AM   #19
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
@Ucenna, well, you wanted me to analyze something... , this isn't exactly much of an analysis, but yesterday, this guy in class pointed out that another guy (my ENTP friend) writes his zeroes clockwise, and observed how weird it was. Well, when I tried it, I realised that that's how I've been doing it too for years, without ever knowing it! We then asked a few other people to write their zeroes, and they all wrote it counter-clockwise. Well, this got me thinking. I did some research, and figured out that apparently lefties predominantly write their zeroes clockwise, while right-handed people go counter-clockwise. I'm right-handed, but somehow, this made sense. I've always been told by people that when I perform certain activities, it's (unconsciously) with my left hand. For example, dealing cards. Also, I would consider myself fairly dexterous, as I'm good at sketching. And strangely enough, the ENTP guy is good with his hands too! He's really good at Origami and working with paper in general.
Also, speaking of my friend, I would consider our thinking the same in many aspects. For example, we both have long discussions on EXTREMELY silly topics. For instance, we once wondered what it would be like if our Chemistry teacher's thoughts were projected out, as though in a movie.
Where we differ.. well, he really puts his thoughts out there. Whatever he thinks of, he just says it. Be it insulting someone, thinking of a witty retort, whatever. Sometimes, his mind works a little differently. It's hard to explain unless it's been witnessed. I feel like his mind just works faster in general, but on the flip side, he doesn't really consider things properly, which might explain why he makes several careless errors in math, or stupid spelling mistakes in any subject, even if he knew how to solve the problem or spell the word, respectively. On the other hand, I have to be sure of what I thought of before projecting it, either in speech or on paper. This leads to me sometimes wasting time in tests, and later regretting it.
As for ISTP, I've read the profiles, as I've considered it multiple times, but I've never thought of myself as so stoic or practical. I've identified with quite a few INTP characteristics, though not all, the most relatable one being that there are thoughts clearly formed in my head, but as I say them, they come out, well, deformed, so to speak.
LOTR.. I've only read the series once, but it was enough for me to fall in love with it. What I like about it.. just the entire fantasy atmosphere. I always thought of it as an escape for me. I would come back home after a bad day, and just wait to escape into that world. It was so comforting, yet magical.. I find it hard to explain what I feel. And it's the same for me for all fantasy series too! Also, as a side note, my favourite character in LOTR was Sam, because, despite his extreme harshness towards Gollum, he was the unsung hero of it all. He fought off Shelob (what an amazing moment), and even carried Frodo up Mount Doom! What can I say, I was extremely depressed at the ending of the series. Well, at least I still have The Silmarillion to read!
Well, that turned out longer than I expected..
What you gave was perfect! Exactly what I needed.
I'm gonna have to agree with Artsu, you're definitely a Ne-Si user. Ti is also a given. I'm gonna have to agree on INTP. I'm fairly confident you're a Ti dom; but if you're still uncertain iSFJ is also an unlikely option. You seem certain of your introversion, but if you're not ENTP and ESFJ are also options. Still, I'm almost positive you're an INTP.

What descriptions do you use. Different sites are better than others. I'd personally recommend Type in Mind and Personality Junkie. Here's some links.
http://www.typeinmind.com/tine/
http://personalityjunkie.com/the-intp/

Ti is indicated in your writing style. You seem to take some care in your wording to maintain logical consistency.

Ne-Si (they're almost inseparable in my mind) is indicated by a preference for facts and experiences. You tend to use semi conceptual wording on occasion, which is what first made me think you were Se-Ni, but your thoughts appear to be grounded in experience. You focus more on the details. The facts. What you've seen and felt and noticed. Also your description of Sam is a huge indicator of Ne-Si. (Sam is amazing, I love Sam. He always tries his hardest to follow his heart. I don't care what everyone says, he's a hero. Also, Tom Bombadil and Glorfindel hold a special place in my heart. I was really bummed that neither of them appeared in the movies. Bombadil is simultaneously quirky and down to earth. And Glorfindel is do mystical. Also he's said to have felled a Balrog in the Silmarillion. He sacrificed his human body to do it(elves reincarnate(parentheses inside parentheses parentheses, how cool is that?!). He pulled a Gandalf before it was cool.)

Fe:
Just stuff you've said. Your wording. And a general sensitivity. You seem to have relatively strong feelings about it. If you think it's stronger than we're giving credit for I'd definitely look at ISFJ. They have relatively strong Tis and yours could easily be well developed(like my or Artsu's is). Conversely, you could be an INTP with a well developed Fe.
My biggest problem with ISFJ is that they're Si is the dominant function. Si users tend to be better at scheduling and organizing and everything. They have a tendency to develop rituals more easily. Almost automatically even.

As for LOTR; the Silmarillion is great, but it reads like a history book. If you're looking for something easier on the ears I'd try "Children of Huron" or "Lays of Beleraind". Both take place in the same universe and are beautiful, beautiful stories. Of note, the later is a series of poems which I have been told are considered "epics".
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th-January-2017, 09:00 AM   #20
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Wow.. thanks! I guess I am an INTP, then. I did make sure to read through ISFJ (my mom is ISFJ and I was curious to see how the type fit her), and I didn't see much of myself reflected in it. The J part in particular was what threw me off. When I was going through personality types earlier, I ruled out all Js and Es, because I am almost completely sure of my introversion and Perceiving nature.
Earlier, I was unsure of my 'INTPness', because on the forums online, all of them were always behaving in the stereotypical INTP manner, discussing astrophysics and the like. I realise now that every one is, indeed, different, me included. It also struck me later on, that, probably, majority of the INTPs on the threads are the ones exhibiting the characteristics INTPs are depicted as having (if that makes any sense). Perhaps the other 'different' INTPs just aren't on the forums or don't know that they're INTPs.

Also, what are the odds? Glorfindel and Tom Bombadil are two of my favourite characters too! Tom was just such a mysterious yet amusing character, he was hard to ignore.

Well, that was quite the journey! Thanks a lot, all of you on this thread, and particularly Ucenna, for sharing my love of LOTR, and also, of course, for helping me find myself.

Last edited by The Flycatcher; 7th-January-2017 at 09:00 AM. Reason: Grammatical error
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th-January-2017, 06:38 AM   #21
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Wow.. thanks! I guess I am an INTP, then. I did make sure to read through ISFJ (my mom is ISFJ and I was curious to see how the type fit her), and I didn't see much of myself reflected in it. The J part in particular was what threw me off. When I was going through personality types earlier, I ruled out all Js and Es, because I am almost completely sure of my introversion and Perceiving nature.
Earlier, I was unsure of my 'INTPness', because on the forums online, all of them were always behaving in the stereotypical INTP manner, discussing astrophysics and the like. I realise now that every one is, indeed, different, me included. It also struck me later on, that, probably, majority of the INTPs on the threads are the ones exhibiting the characteristics INTPs are depicted as having (if that makes any sense). Perhaps the other 'different' INTPs just aren't on the forums or don't know that they're INTPs.
I think the J/P distinction is easily the most confusing. Especially because certain J types such as myself don't actually have a strong J side. I actually spent 3 years mistyping myself as an INFP for this very reason.

I think your right. It seems that each type's online community tends to draw a certain stereotype. If I see a lot of astrophysics on a forum and I'm into aatrophysics, I'm more likely to join.


Also, what are the odds? Glorfindel and Tom Bombadil are two of my favourite characters too! Tom was just such a mysterious yet amusing character, he was hard to ignore.

Have you ever looked at the INFJ description perchance? I'm curious about your thoughts on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Well, that was quite the journey! Thanks a lot, all of you on this thread, and particularly Ucenna, for sharing my love of LOTR, and also, of course, for helping me find myself.
:3
Always happy to meet a fellow hobbit!
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th-January-2017, 09:13 AM   #22
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

I did read up on the INFJ personality, as you suggested. In fact, the website that you suggested, 'Type in Mind', has a description of the INFJ that is different from the ones you find elsewhere. The more I read through it, the more I felt like I could relate. Now I'm unsure again, although, going by the fact that the two types I relate the most to are both IN types, the question of me being an Intuitive or Sensor has been settled. What I'm confused about, however, is the J/P dilemma. I would definitely consider myself an improviser rather than a meticulous planner, but somehow I found myself relating to the INFJ type. How? Even the cognitive functions stacks between INFP and INFJ are fairly different. So.. I'll need some experienced advice here.
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th-January-2017, 11:45 PM   #23
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxubuntufirefox
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
I did read up on the INFJ personality, as you suggested. In fact, the website that you suggested, 'Type in Mind', has a description of the INFJ that is different from the ones you find elsewhere. The more I read through it, the more I felt like I could relate. Now I'm unsure again, although, going by the fact that the two types I relate the most to are both IN types, the question of me being an Intuitive or Sensor has been settled. What I'm confused about, however, is the J/P dilemma. I would definitely consider myself an improviser rather than a meticulous planner, but somehow I found myself relating to the INFJ type. How? Even the cognitive functions stacks between INFP and INFJ are fairly different. So.. I'll need some experienced advice here.
This'll be fun. :P
I wasn't sure. You do display some Ne-Si characteristics that made me lean towards that side. The thing is, for what ever reason, Se-Ni users tend to tone there Ni side down. We live in a Si world, so it's easier to express things that way.
Another thing that stuck out to me is your Fe use. It seems to be fairly strong. Both your Ti and Fe stick out to an extent.
I'll have to think about it some more. Later tonight I'll work on a description of the functions that should help you decide.

As far as J vs P, since we're using functions we don't need to worry about their individual descriptions. For our purposes, they only serve to indicate which functions you use. Here's a quick overview of how you can find the functions based on the MBTI type:
N/S means one of your first 2 functions is either a N function or an S function respectively. (I'm an INFJ, one of my first two functions is an N function)
F/T same as above except for F and T. (I'm an INFJ, the other of the first two functions is an F function)
J/P tells me which of my top two functions is extroverted, either J(F/T) or P(N/S). Which ever one isn't extroverted, is then introverted. For an xNFJ that would mean that the top 2 functions are Fe and Ni in a nonspecific order.
I/E just tells me if my introverted or extroverted function is stronger, so that I can order them. For me it would be Ni-Fe
After this the functions sort of domino down. It's a predictable order, but it's hard to explain the rules behind it. For me it's Ni-Fe-Ti-Se

It's a rather confusing system. The important thing to note is that since we're using functions for typing we can understand the MBTI letter code as a well to figure out someone's functional stack, rather than as a system of characteristics.

Of note, some people dislike functions. For them, each letter represents 2 sides of a scale. Either approach works. I prefer functions because they represent a theory that I can use to better understand MBTI. dichotomies on their own are more data driven.

As fas as planning ahead goes, I'd typically associate that with strong Si or Te use. Si likes to develop rituals and is more likely to follow a specific process. Te aims towards meaningful and successful action, as such they're more likely to form a plan to get what they want.

introverted judging functions are more aimed at making personal decisions that don't necessarily imply action. Fi decides what it values, Ti decides what it thinks makes logical sense.

introverted perceiving functions are more aimed at analysing/reflecting on incoming information. To this end they are paired with extroverted perceiving functions so as to take in information. Si likes to figure out it's impressions of information. Ni likes to figure out how information came to be.

The above is all a generalization. I'll go more indepth on functions later tonight.

In the meantime have a random quiz that will hopefully give me(and you) a better perspective on what your type actually is.


Feel free to answer the following questions however you like. I don't mind reading lots of text. If you feel I haven't provided enough information or have questions of your own, just ask. Also, don't feel obliged to answer all the questions if you don't want to. Honestly, you can answer none of them if you so choose. I won't mind. I'll provide my descriptions tonight anyways, and that might be sufficent for you.


How would a fight between Wolverine and Hulk go? Who would win? Why?


What is your opinion of statistics?


Imagine a fork. Imagine your eye. Imagine stabbing a fork into your eye. Thoughts, feelings, opinions? (I'm sorry, that was mean. It hurt to write it, I can only imagine it hurts to read it)


Thoughts on your car/vehicle of transportation?


You see something move down the road, what is it?


Was the above question a trap?


Do you have a plan for tomorrow?


What do you think your answer to the previous question is going to make me think?


Were you reluctant to answer the question before the last question with a one word answer?


What do you think of this quiz?
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th-January-2017, 06:36 AM   #24
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxubuntufirefox
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Sorry if the quiz is confusing. I feel satisfied with your judging function, you seem to clearly use Ti and Fe. The quiz's purpose therefore, was to further exhibit your perception on things and give a hint towards your perceiving functions.

My description on Ti, Te, Fi, and Fe is going to be relatively light. They seem distinct to me, so there's not much question in my mind as to what they are. I can go more indepth if you'd like though. Also, my understanding of them is less than my understand of perceiving functions.

Ti general strives for logical consistency. Things should be logical at there core.

Te conversely is oriented towards logical application. What sort of effect can logic be used to cause in the real world. If something works, it doesn't matter so much if it's logically consistent.

Fi is about emotional consistency. Emotions should be consistent at their core. You could think of it as a personal value system. Though it's of note that all judging functions naturally help build a value system on their own.

Fe is about outward emotions. In general it's characteristic of taking the emotionalness of a thing inside itself. Predominantly, it focuses on people. But animals, writing, words, music, even atmosphere can seem to have an emotional expression to it. Fe tends to absorb it. Fe is often associated with harmony. In my opinion this is less a direct relationship between harmony and Fe so much as it is a biproduct of Fe's nature. Fe experiences outside emotions. Disharmonious emotions can be unenjoyable to experience. Therefore, harmonious emotions tend to be more cultivated.
But that's just a theory.

You may notice the feeling descriptions are longer. There's a good reason for this: I don't have a super sold grapple on feeling.

Onto perceiving functions

Introverted perceiving(Pi) functions are focused on perceiving data after it has been taken in. Extroverted perceiving(Pe) functions gather in all the data, Pi is what actually inspects it.

Si tends to look at the data as one whole unit. Ne takes in the feelings, thoughts, details, specifics, patterns, potentialities; in short, the metaphysical data. Si sort of collapses all that into an idea of what the object is. Have you ever read "The Giving Tree"? It's a great book. Si looking at the tree, seesand focuses on all the impressions of the tree that have been formed throughout reading the book. Looking at the carving of the heart might trigger a memory of the girl and boy it's associated with. Looking at the chips where the saw cut through the tree might trigger a memory of the tree falling down, or of it's wood being carved into a canoe.
Alternatively, looking at a person's behaviours might trigger memories of someone in the past.
My ENFP friend doesn't like watching sad movies because it reminds her of all the sad things she's experienced in relation to the characters.
Si assoicates things with the context their in. Ni can be thought to as well, but for Si the link is intrinsic. The context and the object are almost inseparable.

Ni takes a different approach. Have you ever heard of Plato's theory of Forms? It bears marked similarities to Ni itself (Plato was an INFJ, actually). Basically, it theorizes that there's a form behind everything. A sort of idea as to what it is. A table for example, has an aspect of "table-iness". "Table-iness" would be it's form. What distinguishes a table from other objects.
In general, Ni tries to strip away as much of the context from an object as it can.
Imagine the first time you see a table. It's a bit scuffed up. When you see the table, you might not recognize the scuffs as an independent element. For you this table represents the essence of table-iness. Later on, you see a brand new table with no scuffs. Both are tables, but one has scuffs and one doesn't. So you refine your idea of the essence of a table. The essence of a table has all the shared characteristics of all the tables you've ever seen. In general, it's an object that usually has 4 legs, and is designed to offer a level above ground level for things to be set on.
Adjectives would be understood by a Ni as a combination of essences. A scuffed oak table combines the essences of scratchiness oakwoodness and table-iness, for example.
Ni is also good at understanding how essences work together to create unique effects. An explosive material which is lit by fire tends to explode. Fire when put into contact with water tends to go out.
In this way, Ni has a tendency to be very predictive. Where Si maps past events to the present to understand the future and past of the present; Ni creates a new map based off of ideas/patterns/connections it's observed and uses that to understand the future and past of the object.

Sorry, didn't really touch on Se. Ne takes in metaphysical data for Si so as to create impression. Se takes in physical data for Ni so as to be deconstructed into essences.

I hope that helps! If you need more or have questions, I'd be happy to oblige!

Edit: Ti likes to quantify things, which is similar to Ni's search for essence. There is a difference though. Ti quantifies things via logical inference. Ni finds the essence of the object by contrasting all known examples of the object and isolating factors until only the shared characteristics remain. Or perhaps more accurately, all the unsimilar characteristics are removed.
For Ni, I'd know a table when I see it. But I don't know if I could define it.
For Ti, this is the definition of a table: ~snip~
Ni and Ti seem to meld together well. Ti helps to better understand what Ni picks up on. But I am an INFJ, so I'm probably biased.
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th-January-2017, 11:44 AM   #25
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Okay here goes.. answers to the quiz:

A fight between the Hulk and Wolverine- The Wolverine could win, because of his regenerative powers. The Hulk technically has no limit to his power. It is proportionate to his anger level. So, if the Wolverine manages to keep the Hulk's anger level at a relatively low level, he should be able to land a finishing blow. Also of note is the level of his regenerative powers. In a certain issue (I'm unsure which one; I learnt of this through a Film Theory. Once again, thanks, Matpat!), he regenerates completely from a speck of blood to which he was reduced. In addition, Wolverine has destroyed the Hulk in Old Man Logan after, and this may be disturbing, he is eaten but not completely digested by the Hulk. He rips out of the Hulk's torso, killing him almost instantly.

Onto the next one!
Statistics... well, it is a very mathematical science, in my opinion, rather than a scientific form of mathematics. It is very useful in studying large scale systems, as it allows for extrapolation of data from, perhaps, a smaller scale. On the other hand, statistics will never be perfectly accurate, as it largely involves taking averages and assumptions, many of them.

Next!
Stabbing a fork into my eye.. okay, so first, rather than pain, it is a sense of extreme discomfort and uneasiness which strikes me. Next, and once again, this may be disturbing, I receive a vague mental image of a fork stabbing through an eye. And in this particular case, I just remembered a scene from Bleach, a Manga, which is vaguely reminiscent of this, wherein a villain makes a ring materialise in another character's eye, not completely in, but partially, rather like a nose ring or ear ring, thus blinding the character.

My car is very spacious. It is not exactly aesthetically pleasing from the outside, but it is very comfortable on the inside. My car has travelled far from home very often. Even though it was bought second hand, it certainly feels like it's been our car from the very beginning. Sorry, I'm not too enthusiastic about describing my car. The previous questions were more fun to answer, you understand.

First of all, I feel the need to say this. When I read the question, the instant imagery I received was of me driving alone at night on a dark road. It's strange, but somehow, even though the question did not mention any specifications, this was what I saw. I saw a black shape moving quickly.

The previous question certainly could have been a trap. Firstly, it is vastly different from the previous question in that the previous ones were asking me what I thought of something... things along those lines. This, however, starts off by declaring a fact, and asking me what it is, as though the questioner knows the answer and is testing me. It seems a bit suspicious. Although that could also be because of the dark setting which I imagine. Also, this seems like the sort of question which might be asked in order to distract me, while they perhaps do something suspicious.

I do have a vague idea of what I'm going to do tomorrow, but I wouldn't call it a 'plan'. The plan will be fully formulated tomorrow, probably when I start doing what I'm supposed to be doing.

I think that the previous answer is going to make you think that I'm a relatively easygoing person who does not believe in planning ahead, and rather believes in improvisation.

Now, I thought about this question for a while, and I realised that it could be interpreted two ways. By 'last question', you could mean the last question in the quiz, in which case the question would be this one which I'm answering, and that would be a strange little loop. BUT, you use the word 'were', which means you're assuming that I've answered the question in question already. Which means 'last' must be taken to mean 'previous'. So, my answer would be, yes, I was reluctant to answer that question with one word, as it was not an absolute answer that I had in mind.

The quiz started off fairly normally. But it got strange when it asked me what I saw. Perhaps even a little eerie (Don't ask me why.) So, all in all, I'm expecting some interesting analysis from this quiz.

Woah.. I've wasted a lot of time on this. I'll get back to you in some time on your explanation of the functions. Thanks!
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th-January-2017, 09:09 PM   #26
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxubuntufirefox
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Okay here goes.. answers to the quiz:
Thanks! Ultimately, you know yourself better than I. I'll right what each answer might have indicated to me, but it's your job to figure out if that matches the reality of yourself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
A fight between the Hulk and Wolverine- The Wolverine could win, because of his regenerative powers. The Hulk technically has no limit to his power. It is proportionate to his anger level. So, if the Wolverine manages to keep the Hulk's anger level at a relatively low level, he should be able to land a finishing blow. Also of note is the level of his regenerative powers. In a certain issue (I'm unsure which one; I learnt of this through a Film Theory. Once again, thanks, Matpat!), he regenerates completely from a speck of blood to which he was reduced. In addition, Wolverine has destroyed the Hulk in Old Man Logan after, and this may be disturbing, he is eaten but not completely digested by the Hulk. He rips out of the Hulk's torso, killing him almost instantly.
Ne's are more outside of the box thinkers, Ni's are more inside the box. For me I tend to be very good at simulating things. I can put a bunch of things inside a box and imagine how they're going to interact. Ni may be inside the box, but Ni has utmost control of the contents of the box. Ne doms conversely, seem to pull ideas that have little to no relation to the contents of the box.
Also, I didn't realize Wolverine's healing factor was so overpowered. Yikes. I think, given even footing, Wolverine wins. Ultimately, given the overwhelming strength of both characters, it would likely boil down to wit. Wolverine does a good job at thinking on his feet.
Of note; Wolverine, at least in the cinematic universe, is a good example of an ISTP. I always found his thinking somewhat relatable, perhaps because we share the same functions.
As for your answer. I feel that it exhibits Ni more than Si. Your sentences are more focused on illustrating the aspects and characteristics of each character's abilities. The extent to which Wolverine regenerates. However, that could also be a characteristic of Ti.

Sorry, wall of text incoming.

If I were to use a word to describe Ne-Si's application in the real world, I'd probably go with Experience. This is what worked well in the past. In general, they're probably better at repeating tasks the same way or assimulating a particular process or method of doing things.

Conversely, for Se-Ni, the word I might use is Instinct. Se is more concerned with the real world how it is in the moment. Ni is more focused on the past and how it reflects certain patterns, relationships, and essences. Ni is more about improving the process of figuring things out on the fly, than it is with improving the process of a particular action.
In my personal experience, I rarely do things in a consistent fashion. I respond to things in the moment, by quickly consider how everything around me is interacting and what direction it's heading towards. As a Ni dom, I can get caught up in consideration and lose myself in the present moment. I tend to zone out if I'm not making a conscious effort to focus. Ni's seem future oriented because, by their nature, they predict(right or wrong) how things are going to pan out. If they don't like the way their predictions are heading, they need to introduce new variables to the system to alter it's course. For me, I frequently throw myself into a system new or old, and let my instincts guide me to the destination I want to head towards Usually I prefer to make a Ti deep analysis first, but I rarely have that luxury.
As a Ni dom, I spend more time predict outcomes and seeing how things are going to pan out, than I do actually interacting.
Wolverine, as a Se aux, spends more time interacting and less time predicting.

Se-Ni tends to exhibit overconfidence, because they think they can quickly adapt to the situation at hand.
Ne-Si tends to exhibit overpreparedness, because there are so many unknown things that could happen.
Se-Ni sees the box and how it works.
Ne(particularly)-Si thinks of all the unexpected things that could come from outside the box and ruin everything.

It's funny that you mentioned MatPat. I'm a big fan. I haven't seen much of his stuff since recently, but I liked his game theories. I'd say he's a strong Ni user. Ne users are good at finding a lot of random out of the box ideas, Ni's are good at figuring out how they work. In theory, a Ni-Ti user can justify anything. Fe and Se act as a good ground. Ni interprets reality and in so doing predicts the future, Fe/Se finds out if the predictions are accurate. If they aren't, than Ni's interpretation is wrong in some respect, and is adjusted accordingly.
Ni is often described as perspectives. Because they see things from many different angles. Ni can easily create new angles and viewports of which to understand things.


Predict the pattern:
?,3,?,?,?,?
?,3,5,?,?,?
?,3,5,7,?,?
Spoiler:

I'm guessing that your prediction is:
1,3,5,7,9,11
Makes the most sense given the facts. However, it's wrong.
Given the fact that your guess is wrong, can you find an alternate perspective to solve the pattern?
Being able to doesn't imply Ni or Si dom-ness. But it does provide some window as to how I figure things out.
Honestly, I don't know if I'd solve it myself. I'm stubborn, so I'd likely force myself to think about it until I figured it out.
There's a hint in the next spoiler tag, and an answer in the spoiler tag after that.

Spoiler:

2,3,5,7,?,?

Spoiler:

2,3,5,7,11,13
aka, prime numbers.



Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Onto the next one!
Statistics... well, it is a very mathematical science, in my opinion, rather than a scientific form of mathematics. It is very useful in studying large scale systems, as it allows for extrapolation of data from, perhaps, a smaller scale. On the other hand, statistics will never be perfectly accurate, as it largely involves taking averages and assumptions, many of them.
It's hard to say. Statistics tend to have a preference amongst Te users, like my IxTJ dad and my ENFP friend, as well as Si users, like an INTP friend.
This is just a guess, but for Si/Ti(still applies to me, though I try to not make decisions based off probability as much as possible) users I think that statistics serve more to indicate a particular trend. Strong statistics can be a good basis for a decision.
For Ni, it sees two sides to every statistic. The 90% side and the 10% side for example. And tries to figure out what factors caused the statistic to split as it did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Next!
Stabbing a fork into my eye.. okay, so first, rather than pain, it is a sense of extreme discomfort and uneasiness which strikes me. Next, and once again, this may be disturbing, I receive a vague mental image of a fork stabbing through an eye. And in this particular case, I just remembered a scene from Bleach, a Manga, which is vaguely reminiscent of this, wherein a villain makes a ring materialise in another character's eye, not completely in, but partially, rather like a nose ring or ear ring, thus blinding the character.
I wasn't sure why I asked this question. I felt like it would be a good indicator or something. Both me and an INTJ I know noticed this phenomena. Of inadvertently feeling a certain response to thoughts like this. I personally can't stand the sound of forks scraping against teeth. I doubt it's a phenomena exclusively mapped to Ni doms though.
Your answer sounds very Ni to me. In fact, at this point I'm fairly confident you're a Ni user. You're description is very essential in nature. "Vaguely reminiscent" "Not completely in the eye, but particially, in the way that a nose or ear ring would be put into the eye, and in such a way as to prevent vision." It just felt very Ni-y.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
My car is very spacious. It is not exactly aesthetically pleasing from the outside, but it is very comfortable on the inside. My car has travelled far from home very often. Even though it was bought second hand, it certainly feels like it's been our car from the very beginning. Sorry, I'm not too enthusiastic about describing my car. The previous questions were more fun to answer, you understand.
Of course! This was more a Si question than a Ni question. I was hunting for signs of Si ness. Your description still seems to have a lot of Ni to it. Your car has the aspects of spaciousness, it's outside doe not have any aesthetically pleasing qualities, the inside offers comfort. It's very descriptive and informative.
Also, I noted you used "our car" instead of "my car" once. Interesting...

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
First of all, I feel the need to say this. When I read the question, the instant imagery I received was of me driving alone at night on a dark road. It's strange, but somehow, even though the question did not mention any specifications, this was what I saw. I saw a black shape moving quickly.
I was mostly curious what your mind might generate. If anything at all. It seems you were aware that the question didn't mention any specifics(Which was intentional. Somehow I think you knew this though...), still this quiz is a quiz about perceptions and you elected to answer anyway. The fact that you did fill in the blanks isn't particularly indicative of a function, everyone does that to an extent. What is indicative is your approach to the question. You being a Ni user is beginning to seem more and more likely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
The previous question certainly could have been a trap. Firstly, it is vastly different from the previous question in that the previous ones were asking me what I thought of something... things along those lines. This, however, starts off by declaring a fact, and asking me what it is, as though the questioner knows the answer and is testing me. It seems a bit suspicious. Although that could also be because of the dark setting which I imagine. Also, this seems like the sort of question which might be asked in order to distract me, while they perhaps do something suspicious.
Interesting. I actually had no idea how you were going to answer the previous question. It was a trap to some extent. I was curious if you'd answer the question in context of the questions preceding it. Like the car question before it. I wouldn't say doing so would indicate anything though. I was mostly curious, and was hoping it would draw more of your cognitive process into view.
Ultimately, that is the purpose of this test.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
I do have a vague idea of what I'm going to do tomorrow, but I wouldn't call it a 'plan'. The plan will be fully formulated tomorrow, probably when I start doing what I'm supposed to be doing.

I think that the previous answer is going to make you think that I'm a relatively easygoing person who does not believe in planning ahead, and rather believes in improvisation.
The ultimate goal was to find your perspective on my perspective. In general, that sounds a lot like how I make plans.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Now, I thought about this question for a while, and I realised that it could be interpreted two ways. By 'last question', you could mean the last question in the quiz, in which case the question would be this one which I'm answering, and that would be a strange little loop. BUT, you use the word 'were', which means you're assuming that I've answered the question in question already. Which means 'last' must be taken to mean 'previous'. So, my answer would be, yes, I was reluctant to answer that question with one word, as it was not an absolute answer that I had in mind.
I should probably talk about the distinction between Ne and Ni. In general, I automatically link them with their Si and Se counterparts, but this is mostly because I'm a Ni dom. It's all but impossible to understand my Se outside of Ni. I'd imagine that a Se dom would have a similar but reversed perspective.
Ne tends to be divergent. It starts with one idea and finds/makes millions of related ideas. Each impression that a Si user gets from Ni is going to share some characteristics with other impressions, causing a sort of link between them. My Ne dom ENFP friend jumps from idea to seemingly unrelated idea very quickly. They're linked to her, and I can sorta almost follow her reasoning. But I can't predict it. I don't have her experience.
Ni conversely, is convergent in nature. It takes a lot of different ideas and synthesizes them into one core idea. Lots of tables into one idea of tableness. Or all the object/people/feeling/ideas in this room, to where those objects/people/etc. are going to be in ten minutes. It's more intentional. Or who will win in a fight x or y(though Ti can also answer this question just by virtue of analysis).

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
The quiz started off fairly normally. But it got strange when it asked me what I saw. Perhaps even a little eerie (Don't ask me why.) So, all in all, I'm expecting some interesting analysis from this quiz.
:P I hope I haven't dissappointed. The quiz took a rather meta approach, which was intentional. I'm focusing on Si more in this quiz than Ne, because my understand of Ni vs Si is much stronger than my understand of Se vs Ne. Pi is very meta in nature. Pe is more focused in the here and now; Se with reality, Ne with ideas(But the ideas don't like to stay down. Ne tends to quickly jump to new unrelated ideas). Pi examines the reality Pe brings in from a meta perspective; Si compares the ideas and thoughts that Ne has experienced with past impressions of objects or scenarios, Ni breaks the Se reality into the ideas it's composed of.

You seem very Ni to me. I think that it's likely you're a INFJ. INTJ is unlikely because I don't see much Fi or Te in you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Woah.. I've wasted a lot of time on this. I'll get back to you in some time on your explanation of the functions. Thanks!
Sorry! I hope it was worth it!

Also sorry if my posts are too raw or verbose. I have a bad habit of not reviewing what I write. I constantly think of better ways to phrase things, and I'd rather not rewrite my posts 10 times before submitting them.



Also, have you seen The Mentalist?

Edit:
I've found myself dissatisfied with my ability to describe functions. I have an intuitive Ni understand of functions, and Ti has quantified much of it. But when it comes down to actually putting it into words Fe has to parse Ti's partial definitions and Ti has to keep a whether eye of out for logical inconsistencies.
Basically, if turns into a big game of telephone, leaving my final answer feeling less than adequate.
I dug up some of the good reference material that I've found or been shown over the ages. If you want a solid Ti analysis of functions, I'd recommend taking a look here:
http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=6582
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th-January-2017, 06:27 AM   #27
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

I think I've been to focused on the difference between Ni and Si, when in reality I should be focusing on Ni vs Ti.
For me, as a Ni and Ti user, I can have difficulty separating the two. I was reluctant to touch on the difference initially, but I've developed a better understanding of the two, and I've been able to separate the two in my mind.

Both Ni and Ti(Ti-Ne particularly) have a relatively holistic view towards objects. However, it needs to be understood that Ni, unlike Ti, is not a reasoning function. It shouldn't be understood as unreasonable, in fact it's observations are logical sound, but it doesn't actively employ logic to "figure things out", it simple observes information.

Imagine a deck of cards, and imagine that this is the first time you are seeing a deck of cards.
Ni looks at the back side of the card and sees a pattern. It looks at the front side of the card and sees the number 7 as well as 7 hearts on the card face.
It now has formed a tentative understanding of the idea of a card:
-It's back side has a pattern
-It's front side has the number 7 on it.
-It's front side has red 7 hearts on it.

Ni flips up the next card. It's back is the same, but the front has the number 6 with 6 hearts on it.
It now refines it's tentative understand of the idea of a card.
-It's back has the same fixed pattern
-It's front has a number on it. (A number that could be, but is not necessarily limited to, 6 or 7. Ni knows it could be 6 or 7, and it's not going to be surprised to see any other number. For it, the number has become an external detail that is outside of the essence of the card.)
-It has a number of red hearts on it equal to the printed number on it.

Ni flips up another card, a 6 of spades. It's tentative understanding changes:
-It's back side has a fixed pattern.
-It's front side is a number that could be but is not limited to 6-7. (It's beginning to wonder if 6-7 are the only two numbers that are possible.)
-It has a number of pips on it equal to the printed number. These pips vary in symbol and color. At the moment there appear to be only 2 possible colors and 2 possible symbols.

Eventually Ni flips through the whole deck. It discovers that there are 2 possible colors in this particular deck, and 4 possible symbols. It realizes that the printed numbers range from 2-10, and that there are 4 unique styles. It connects that single pip on the Ace with the pips visible on numbered cards, it thus supposes that Ace might represent 1. It hasn't seen any negative numbers. Negative numbers are possible, but why bother with unknown possibilities?(This is more of Ne's realm) Given known data, things appear to have positive values, except when they have letter values. Positive numbers seem to be the most likely possibility. Personally, I tend to avoid making assumptions (probably because of tertairy Ti). Some Nis though, might consider that probability and assume that J,Q, and K represent 11, 12, and 13. But if they don't connect J, Q, and K with anything else(like medieval times, or card games they've played); they won't know which letter corresponds with which number.
That's a vague understanding of how Ni works. As a Ni dom, this seems pretty normal for me. I find it hard to believe that others don't make these connections in as straightforward a way as this.
If a Si user reads this, I'd appreciate the external insight.

Ti also has a somewhat holistic approach. Ti-Ne impraticular.
Ti searchs and finds a logical truth. Ne finds all the possibilities and possible implications of that truth. Ti analyses those possible truths and proves or disproves them either with other logical truths(Ti) or based on observation of the past(Si).
That's my vague, non-Ne user understanding of it anyways.
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th-January-2017, 12:59 AM   #28
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

First of all, sorry for the extremely long delay in replying. I've been very busy these past few days, but I can imagine that sending messages on the thread with no one to reply must have felt like talking to a wall.
I did read up on the Cognitive functions on that link you suggested. Only then did I truly realise the superiority (if I may use this word) of the cognitive functions to simply the dichotomies in typing. I was pleased to see the variations in a personality type which the cognitive functions accomodate, rather than the very hard and fast rules system of the dichotomies.
This is slightly unrelated, but I felt like it had to be said. So, here goes. Ever since I learnt of the MBTI system and got INTP as a result of one of those online tests (this was back when I was unaware of the relative inaccuracy of these tests), I started analysing my thoughts. A lot. I start thinking of something, then stop and then analyse what I was thinking of and why. It continues even further. I then start analysing why I was analysing my thoughts in the first place. "I never did this BEFORE finding out about the MBTI, so why now? Is it because, deep down, I WANT to be an Intuitive, and the analysing makes me feel like I am? No, it can't be." I then dispel this entire chain of thought, and try to forget about it, only to find myself doing the same thing a few hours later. Whew, it felt relieving to open up about that mental dilemma I've been having.
The one thing is.. I don't know if my Fe is really an auxiliary function for me. Generally, when I'm around people, I wouldn't consider myself a feeling sort of person; in fact, I occasionally make sarcastic remarks. Is this something typical of INFJs? Do INFJs often hide in public behind an Ti dominant cover? But, I feel the need to mention this, if something crosses the line, for example, making fun of someone, I feel uncomfortable just watching it happen, but at the same time, I can't bring myself to go out there and stop it. But I do try, in subtle or diplomatic ways, perhaps like saying, "Don't you think you're going a little too far this time?"
Also, no, I don't follow The Mentalist, but I have watched about 2 episodes. Do you recommend it? Not that I'll have time, but I can try.
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th-January-2017, 07:59 AM   #29
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
windows_xp_2003safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
First of all, sorry for the extremely long delay in replying. I've been very busy these past few days, but I can imagine that sending messages on the thread with no one to reply must have felt like talking to a wall.
Seriously, it's fine! I don't mind talking to walls, most of them are very interesting! They seem to share my deep, introspective nature and love for sitting in the same place for hours on end.
As for these two sentences and all the sentences you've posted that offer a similar vibe, I'd say they are a strong indicator of Fe. And of Ni too in their own way.
Ni is good at seeing things from multiple perspectives. You jumping into my perspective and imagining how I felt is on it's own indicative of Ni.
Also having a very real regard towards my feelings is indicative of Fe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
I did read up on the Cognitive functions on that link you suggested. Only then did I truly realise the superiority (if I may use this word) of the cognitive functions to simply the dichotomies in typing. I was pleased to see the variations in a personality type which the cognitive functions accomodate, rather than the very hard and fast rules system of the dichotomies.

I love functions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
This is slightly unrelated, but I felt like it had to be said. So, here goes. Ever since I learnt of the MBTI system and got INTP as a result of one of those online tests (this was back when I was unaware of the relative inaccuracy of these tests), I started analysing my thoughts. A lot. I start thinking of something, then stop and then analyse what I was thinking of and why. It continues even further. I then start analysing why I was analysing my thoughts in the first place. "I never did this BEFORE finding out about the MBTI, so why now? Is it because, deep down, I WANT to be an Intuitive, and the analysing makes me feel like I am? No, it can't be." I then dispel this entire chain of thought, and try to forget about it, only to find myself doing the same thing a few hours later. Whew, it felt relieving to open up about that mental dilemma I've been having.
I can relate to that. When I was first introduced to MBTI I did a LOT of self analysis. I have a very annoying tendency to fit myself to any skin I find. Ni is perspective focused, and it can easily imagine alternative perspectives to view information. When I mistyped myself as an INFP I saw myself and my actions from the INFP perspective, for example. Ni makes mistyping real easy.
Actually, I went through a pretty similar pattern. I wanted to be an INFJ(An INFJ introduced me to typology, and she made them sound pretty awesome.) I actually refused to read the INFJ description for quite sometime least my biased lead me to mistype myself. (Also, I was convinced I wasn't a J. Stupid dichotomy descriptions.)
I'm definitely familiar with super meta thought chains, but I can't say for certain if they're predominant in any particular function.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
The one thing is.. I don't know if my Fe is really an auxiliary function for me. Generally, when I'm around people, I wouldn't consider myself a feeling sort of person; in fact, I occasionally make sarcastic remarks. Is this something typical of INFJs? Do INFJs often hide in public behind an Ti dominant cover? But, I feel the need to mention this, if something crosses the line, for example, making fun of someone, I feel uncomfortable just watching it happen, but at the same time, I can't bring myself to go out there and stop it. But I do try, in subtle or diplomatic ways, perhaps like saying, "Don't you think you're going a little too far this time?"
I can understand that. INFJ is typically one of the most T of the F types. It's not uncommon for INFJs to mistype themselves as INTJs. I feel like many supposed INFJs are not actually, and many supposed not INFJs really are. This tends to skew typing even more and has seemed to even affect some descriptions.(though those descriptions might be dichometric rather than functional.)
When I'm not in an emotional/social setting, I'm easily mistaken for a Tx user. At one point I was tempted to stack my functions as NiTi(which could theoretically be possible).
But as soon as I put myself in an emotional setting, Fe would jump out of hiding.
Ultimately though, if I'm not actively acting in a Fe oriented way, I will seem more cold and calculated. I've been accused of being unfeeling before.
For me though, I still absorb emotions through Fe. If people are super happy or super sad, I'll feel the same way. One of the things I like about movies, anime, video games, etc; is that it allows me to experience the emotions of the characters.
Also, I hate watching people embarrass themselves. It's painful.

Random joke:
What's the hardest part of a vegetable to eat?
Spoiler:
The Wheelchair

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Also, no, I don't follow The Mentalist, but I have watched about 2 episodes. Do you recommend it? Not that I'll have time, but I can try.
I personally love it, but everyone's different. Of note, I'm fairly certain the main character is an INFJ.

Also, I believe House is an INTJ.

Of note, INFJs tend to differ from INFJ to INFJ. There are more factors to a person than just functions. Motivation, environment, genetics. Most INFJs I know are more extroverted than me.

Random additional reading if you're so inclined: (Actually, I just enjoyed the link. Thought you might too.)
http://intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=7016

What are your thoughts? Ni dom seem to fit?
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th-January-2017, 12:40 PM   #30
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

I can definitely relate to what you said about being mistyped as an INFP, because it happened to me with INTP. The more I read INTP descriptions, the more I felt like I could relate to it. And I think that I knew in the back of my mind that I was twisting the idea I have of myself just to fit the characteristics of INTPs. I tried to imagine that the descriptions fit me well, so I could satisfy the description of INTPs that the type required.
As for Ni.. sometimes I keep doubting even the fact that I am an N dominant type.. I can't exactly say why, but I just start wondering, after reading all the descriptions of what Intuition is in Typology, and just the general idea that Intuitives are always thinking of the future. It's kind of thrown me off. There are times where I get very caught up in the moment, and really just see nothing else, and when I think of those moments, I start questioning my 'Intuitiveness'. And it really doesn't help that Intuitives are generally considered to be the rarer ones in the population. Yes, I know that I'm saying 'Intuitives' as though in terms of MBTI, but I mean the types which have Nx as a dominant/auxiliary function. Then there are moments where I am convinced that I am Nx dominant/auxiliary. Sometimes, I wonder.. is this drifting off of the mind something that only Intuitives do? Or is it something that all types do, and only more on Intuitives? Of course, I'm sure it happens to all of us, but sometimes I wonder if Nx is even on the top of my functional stack.
And yes, I have in fact realised while typing this all out, that all this wondering that I've been doing about whether I'm Ni, ironically enough, points to the fact that I am Ni.
But I can never seem to completely trust only my opinion or judgement, so.. I always find that it is better to have a second opinion.
I read through the entire link that you posted, and it was very interesting and insightful! And to think that an INTP knew so much about INFJs!
I may consider the description of the Ti INFJ that was described in the article...
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th-January-2017, 03:32 PM   #31
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

To add, on some more introspection, I've developed a new question. When I drift off into the world of my thoughts, I often find myself just remembering things that had happened maybe a few days ago, or even a few months ago, sometimes. I start by thinking of something, but my mind drifts off (as usual) and I end up thinking of past experiences. Does this indicate Si or is it something that an Ni would do too?
Also, I was wondering if you would be able to elaborate on why you scrapped the Si Ne idea.
...And there. I'm confused again. I read through the ISFJ description, and there were a few things I could relate to there too. But on the other hand, I don't see myself as dutiful or organised at all. As for preserving traditions, I would consider myself the opposite of that. In fact, the career that I wish to pursue goes against everything conventional in society.
I don't believe at all in following traditions which I believe have no real sense behind them. Sounds a little harsh, but this is honestly how I feel.
On the other hand, I can relate to some characteristics of ISFJs. For instance, the specific point about how ISFJs take little bits of everything that they have learnt, and put it together for a project, that point really resonates with something that I once did for a Chemistry project.
When I did some research and read about Ni.. I felt like I'm not that capable. I don't really know how good I am at pattern recognition or Intuitions like Ni types are said to be. Somehow, it seemed to me from the descriptions online that Ni types just know, somehow. I don't find in myself an Intuition that powerful. So, I'm not sure if I'm an Nx dominant or auxillary, or Sx dominant or auxillary.
I'm starting to wonder if I'm overthinking this...
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th-January-2017, 02:53 AM   #32
reckful
INTJ
 
reckful's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 89
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Hello, possibly fellow INTPs! I say this because I'm utterly unsure of my MBTI type. I've heard that the tests are fairly inaccurate, so I decided to try and do a self-typing instead, at which point I realised that I'm a mixture of a number of types.
The official MBTI is really the only test that has a lot of psychometric support behind it. If you've never taken it, here's an online copy. It doesn't score you automatically, but it shows which preference corresponds to each response, so you can calculate your result for each dimension. I'd be curious to see your scores.

And in case you're up for taking it and are interested in some guidance with respect to the proper "frame of mind," here's what the MBTI Manual says:
Some people have trouble finding the correct frame of mind for answering the MBTI. When reporting the results to some people, they say they reported their "work self," "school self," "ideal self," or some other self they now consider atypical. The frame of reference desired in respondents is what has been termed the "shoes-off self." The "shoes-off self" fosters an attitude in which one functions naturally, smoothly, and effortlessly, and in which one is not going "against one's grain." The function of the MBTI is to provide the first step toward understanding one's natural preferences.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
This is probably going to seem weird, but the two types I identify the most with are ISFP and INTP. Yes, yes, I know. They're almost on opposite ends of the personality spectrum. But hear (or read) me out.

I'm definitely into art. Sketching out my imagination, or doodling random things is one of my favourite pastimes. BUT at the same time, when I'm alone or in a quiet setting, I find myself musing deep concepts, or even my own thoughts.
It sounds like you may be under the common (but mistaken) impression that ISFP is a more likely arts-oriented type than INFP or INTP — but the opposite is actually true. INFP is arguably the single most likely artist type (with INFJ and INTP both runner-up contenders), while ISFP is a relatively unlikely artist type. The "ISFP as artist" notion came from David Keirsey, and I think Keirsey had quite a few insightful things to say, but the ISFP=artist thing was probably his biggest mistake.

For a lot more on that, see this Typology Central post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Also, speaking of my friend, I would consider our thinking the same in many aspects. ...

Where we differ.. well, he really puts his thoughts out there. Whatever he thinks of, he just says it. Be it insulting someone, thinking of a witty retort, whatever. Sometimes, his mind works a little differently. It's hard to explain unless it's been witnessed. I feel like his mind just works faster in general, but on the flip side, he doesn't really consider things properly, which might explain why he makes several careless errors in math, or stupid spelling mistakes in any subject, even if he knew how to solve the problem or spell the word, respectively. On the other hand, I have to be sure of what I thought of before projecting it, either in speech or on paper. This leads to me sometimes wasting time in tests, and later regretting it.
Myers emphasized that there are a lot of personality characteristics that more than one of the MBTI dimensions can contribute to, and I'd say thinking before acting — as compared to shooting first, and asking questions later — is one of those.

In Gifts Differing, Myers noted that extraverts "often act quickly, sometimes without thinking," while introverts "like to think a lot before they act, sometimes without acting"; and separately referred to introverts' "characteristic pause before action, which extraverts carelessly call hesitation."

But on the other hand, as you probably know, the J/P dimension also includes a tendency to prefer impulsive, spontaneous behavior (the P side) vs. a tendency to prefer more planful and deliberate behavior (the J side). The most well-known version of the Big Five is McCrae & Costa's NEO-PI-R, and its version of the Conscientiousness dimension (which is generally understood to be tapping into the same underlying personality dimension as J/P) has a facet labeled "Deliberation" — and as McCrae & Costa explain:

Quote:
Originally Posted by McCrae & Costa
Deliberation is the tendency to think carefully before acting. High scorers on this facet are cautious and deliberate. Low scorers are hasty and often speak or act without considering the consequences. At best, low scorers are spontaneous and able to make snap decisions when necessary.
I think it's fair to say that EPs are the most impulsive types, IJs are the most cautious types, and EJs and IPs are in between.

Moving to a more general issue, Ucenna has posted:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ucenna View Post
Firstly, there a two core trains of thought:
Dichotomies:
I v E
S v N
F v T
J v N

Functions:
Fe, Te, Ti, Fi, Ne, Se, Ni, Si
Etc

They're mutually exclusive. I prefer functions personally, they're more based on theory. I like theory.
Imma start by noting that the dichotomy-centric and function-centric MBTI perspectives are hardly "mutually exclusive," and that both involve "theory" — which I'm also quite fond of.

I'd say the distinction between the dichotomy-centric and function-centric MBTI theories is better framed as the difference between a theory that can point to a respectable amount of empirical support and a theory that can't.

Carl Jung (mystical streak notwithstanding) was a believer in the scientific approach, and Isabel Myers took Psychological Types and devoted a substantial chunk of her life to putting its typological concepts to the test in a way that Jung never had, and in accordance with the psychometric standards applicable to the science of personality.

And it's reasonably clear that Myers, despite quite a bit of lip service to Jung and the functions, came to understand (based on her many years of data-gathering) that the dichotomies were the essential components of Jungian/MBTI type. I agree with James Reynierse, an MBTI practitioner who has rightly (IMO) concluded — in a 2009 article ("The Case Against Type Dynamics") in the journal published by the official MBTI folks — that the eight faux-Jungian "cognitive functions" that people like Linda Berens love to talk about are best viewed as nothing more than a "category mistake."

After you did some looking into the functions, you said you were "pleased to see the variations in a personality type which the cognitive functions accomodate, rather than the very hard and fast rules system of the dichotomies" — but that reflects a misunderstanding of what a dichotomy-centric perspective involves. Contrary to the notion that a function-centric perspective offers more richness and depth than a (properly framed) dichotomy-centric perspective, and as Reynierse explains in that linked article, it's actually the dichotomy-centric perspective that's richer and more flexible.

Myers spent quite a lot of Gifts Differing talking about aspects of personality that corresponded to any number of dichotomy combinations, including the combinations that purportedly correspond to the cognitive functions. But it's worth noting that she really didn't treat the function-related combinations as if they had any special significance — and in fact, Myers thought the most meaningful preference combinations were ST, SF, NT and NF (each of which includes four types with four different dominant functions).

In any case, though, any deep, true thing that can be said about a (supposed) Ti-dom, for example, can just as well be said about an I_TP. If you're looking for a limiting framework, give a listen to any of the large number of MBTI forumites whose posts indicate that the MBTI "letters" really don't say much about anyone, and that INTJs and INTPs have little in common — because I and N and T (and the IN and NT and IT combinations) pretty much just correspond to trivial "surface" stuff. There's the limiting and impoverished perspective if you ask me. And it certainly isn't a Jungian perspective. Jung spent more of Psychological Types talking about the things he thought extraverts had in common and introverts had in common than he spent talking about all eight of the functions put together.

And as for the aspects of the "cognitive functions" framing that go beyond (or are inconsistent with) the dichotomy-centric model: those are the aspects that have no respectable body of data behind them, and have instead tended to be contradicted by the data on those rare occasions when they've been put to the test — an issue Reynierse also discusses in that linked article. The notion that an INFP has "tertiary Si," and will therefore tend (probabilistically speaking) to have "Si" aspects of personality in common with a typical ISTJ that ISTPs tend not to exhibit, is a typological assertion that — like all assertions that crosscut the dichotomies in that counterintuitive way — has no more validity than the notion that two people born at around the same time will tend to have aspects of personality in common because they're both Capricorns.

And before I leave that subject, allow me to point out that the forum-famous model that says that INTJ=Ni-Te-Fi-Se and INTP=Ti-Ne-Si-Fe (and ZOMG, INTJs and INTPs have no functions in common) is the Harold Grant function stack — and it's a model that's inconsistent with Jung, inconsistent with Myers, and has never been endorsed by the official MBTI folks. More importantly, and unlike the respectable districts of the MBTI, that function stack has no substantial body of evidence behind it — and indeed, should probably be considered all but disproven at this point, given that the correlational patterns associated with it have stubbornly failed to show up in over 50 years of MBTI data pools.

The notion that, if you're a "Ti type," you're also an "Fe type" — and ditto for the Te/Fi, Ni/Se and Ne/Si pairs (the so-called "function axes," or "tandems") — is also a byproduct of the Grant model, and it's nonsense.

If you're ever in the mood for a hefty helping of input on the relationship between the dichotomies and the functions, the place of the functions (or lack thereof) in the MBTI's history, the tremendous gap between the dichotomies and the functions in terms of scientific respectability, and the unbearable bogosity of the Grant function stack, you can find a lot of potentially eye-opening discussion in this Typology Central post and the posts it links to.

A-a-and as a final note (well, almost), that last linked post is in a thread that also includes a 10-post (I am not making this up) extravaganza with a boatload of type-me-related input from me, including a separate section on each of the four MBTI dimensions, a link to roundups of online profiles for each of the 16 types, a brief intro to the Big Five neuroticism dimension, and a contrarian discussion of that perennial puzzler, "can I haz INTx?" — and if you're interested, that 10-post series starts here.

Ucenna mentioned that you might want to ponder the F possibility, and I concur. I'm not saying I have a significant F lean or anything, but I'm forever noting that I think it's not uncommon for INFs to test as INTs, at least partly because many of the F choices on typical MBTI tests (including the official test) are choices that are more likely to appeal to SFs and EFs than INFs. And you can find a little more discussion of that issue, and quite a lot more of my take on T/F, in three of those ten TC posts.
reckful is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th-January-2017, 07:12 AM   #33
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Reckful!!
I'm glad you came. It's good to have both functional and dichometric perspectives available. And in your posts you seem to have a firm understanding of both.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
I can definitely relate to what you said about being mistyped as an INFP, because it happened to me with INTP. The more I read INTP descriptions, the more I felt like I could relate to it. And I think that I knew in the back of my mind that I was twisting the idea I have of myself just to fit the characteristics of INTPs. I tried to imagine that the descriptions fit me well, so I could satisfy the description of INTPs that the type required.
Yeah. It's something painfully easy to do. Actually when I mistyped, I ended up twisting the idea of the functions and dichotomies to fit me. When I retyped as INFJ, everything sort of fell into place. Though it wasn't an initial click mind you. Many online descriptions are bad. It took me some time to find/develop an accurate understanding of the functions, and I did spend some period of uncertainty before settling down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
As for Ni.. sometimes I keep doubting even the fact that I am an N dominant type.. I can't exactly say why, but I just start wondering, after reading all the descriptions of what Intuition is in Typology, and just the general idea that Intuitives are always thinking of the future. It's kind of thrown me off.
Honestly, most of the online descriptions for functions really really suck. It's painfully difficult to dig your way through the riffraff. I'd recommend the original link that I linked above (http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=6582), as well as the Type in Mind descriptions of functions. Type in Mind is a function based typing system that uses the MBTI types for convenience(Generally they prefer to use NiFe, TiNe, and so on). Thanks to reckful I've come to associate official MBTI as purely dichometric based, but truly it's a bit of both (depending on who you ask). The internet community and some official practitioners seem to remain indecisive as to what it is truly based on. It makes communication rather difficult.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
There are times where I get very caught up in the moment, and really just see nothing else, and when I think of those moments, I start questioning my 'Intuitiveness'. And it really doesn't help that Intuitives are generally considered to be the rarer ones in the population.
Definitely. Makes ISxJs difficult to type especially, because their descriptions seem to be peppered with undesired traits.

As for acting in the moment. It really depends. Depending on exactly how it's expressed, I'd say that it's less common for a Pi dom. It does still happen though. Back when I used to work fast food, there'd be times I'd have to let go of all unnecessary thoughts just to keep up. (Actually, I sucked at fast food. Would not recommend.)

In general, I'd expect "living in the moment" to be more common in dominant or auxilary Pe and some dominant Je users. For dichotomies I'd agree with reckful that there is a correlation between Es and Ps. Se seems to be especially apt to live in the moment.

Ni doms are typically focused on perception first. I've always describe my Se as having a pinkie hold on reality. I'm often surprised at how quickly I can react to things. However if I get too lost in my mind, I can all but completely let go of my surroundings. It's not uncommon for me to miss a turn and find myself taking a slightly longer route than I had intended.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
And yes, I have in fact realised while typing this all out, that all this wondering that I've been doing about whether I'm Ni, ironically enough, points to the fact that I am Ni.
But I can never seem to completely trust only my opinion or judgement, so.. I always find that it is better to have a second opinion.
It's funny, this is almost exactly what I wrote(with different words) when I was unsure of my type:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ucenna View Post
I have a firm grasp on much of MBTI/Socionics. However, I may just think I have a firm grasp. It's possible that my understanding of the system is flawed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
I read through the entire link that you posted, and it was very interesting and insightful! And to think that an INTP knew so much about INFJs!
I may consider the description of the Ti INFJ that was described in the article...
I love INTPs! They seem to be able to put into words the thoughts that I never could. Ti-Ne truly is a killer combo for quantifying ideas. They're probably the main reason I joined this forum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
To add, on some more introspection, I've developed a new question. When I drift off into the world of my thoughts, I often find myself just remembering things that had happened maybe a few days ago, or even a few months ago, sometimes. I start by thinking of something, but my mind drifts off (as usual) and I end up thinking of past experiences. Does this indicate Si or is it something that an Ni would do too?
Of all the descriptions of functions out there, Si's description probably sucks the most.

Pi is reflective by nature. It mulls over past events and draws insight from them.

Conversely, Pe is more in the moment. I'd say that Pe is probably the functional set I understand the least. (hence I kept trying to link them with Pi. I've come to decide that it's a distinct function however.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Also, I was wondering if you would be able to elaborate on why you scrapped the Si Ne idea.
My initial understanding was that Pe fueled Pi.
I ultimately changed my mind because I decided that the two functions are independent. Being a Pi dom, and not using Pe much, it can be difficult to distinguish one from the other. Pe might draw from Pi at times when acting in the moment, and Pi might draw from Pe at times when reflecting; but I don't think the link is as strong as I initially described. I'm not saying that what I expressed was necessarily inaccurate, I'm just attempting to indicate that the link is not necessarily as strong as I implied. I used to think that they were "dependent" on each other. Functions are methods of operation, and they naturally use information from each other. But they aren't mutually dependent by necessity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
...And there. I'm confused again. I read through the ISFJ description, and there were a few things I could relate to there too. But on the other hand, I don't see myself as dutiful or organised at all. As for preserving traditions, I would consider myself the opposite of that. In fact, the career that I wish to pursue goes against everything conventional in society.
I don't believe at all in following traditions which I believe have no real sense behind them. Sounds a little harsh, but this is honestly how I feel.
Si isn't bound to traditions like many of it's description express it to be. TypeInMind has a more accurate definition for it I think: (borrowed from ISFJ description)
SiFe’s naturally use Si to catalogue experiences and information they deem important. In particular, they remember their impressions of experiences they’ve had. They have an organized internal world and their mind can easily put similar pieces of information into appropriate categories. They learn straightforward, practical systems, rules, and strategies with ease and grace. Si gives the sense of the SiFe being grounded and having a linear, black and white way of thinking about things.
The description is similar to Ni in many ways, because Si and Ni have the same purpose. They just go about there task in different ways. Si isn't actually tradition oriented. But Pi does learn from experience. Si in general is more reluctant than Ni to shift it's perspective, however. It does something a certain way, and when it thinks back on it's impression of doing that something it finds success and goodness. Why change what works? But if the impression is unfavorable, it tries to find a new method.
Si deals with objects and it's impression of them, Ni deals more with the ideas and connections that form an object. Because of this, Ni tends to be more reluctant to stick with something just because it works(giving it a Pish vibe, I think). Ni is quick to find the ideas that are unnecessary to it's intention. Why do something that doesn't actually help?

As a Ni dom, it's been my experience that I seem to take an almost algorithmic approach to getting things done. I don't follow instructions much, I simply figure out what I need to do when I do it. This also seems to apply to repeated processes. I almost unconscious reconstruct how to do something as I do it again.

Not to imply that Ni doesn't follow instructions or that Si doesn't tweak methods. When Ni sees a good design it is curious as to what about it makes it good. And when Si sees a flaw in a method, or simple desires to improve it, it attempts to find a new method or tweak that offers an improvement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
On the other hand, I can relate to some characteristics of ISFJs. For instance, the specific point about how ISFJs take little bits of everything that they have learnt, and put it together for a project, that point really resonates with something that I once did for a Chemistry project.
I'd say that's more indicative of Pi than Si or Ni specifically.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
When I did some research and read about Ni.. I felt like I'm not that capable. I don't really know how good I am at pattern recognition or Intuitions like Ni types are said to be. Somehow, it seemed to me from the descriptions online that Ni types just know, somehow. I don't find in myself an Intuition that powerful. So, I'm not sure if I'm an Nx dominant or auxillary, or Sx dominant or auxillary.
I'm starting to wonder if I'm overthinking this...
Tales of Ni's otherworldly powers have been greatly exaggerated.
For Ni users, insights just makes sense. Typically, because those insights are not inherently logical(perception does not apply logic in and of itself) it can be difficulty for Ni user to articulate their thoughts. Especially because N is more focused on the ideas behind something and less with the physical reality that is perhaps more readily explainable.

Ni insights make sense to Ni users, even if they can't be expressed. But without understanding how the insight came up, they can seem almost psychic to outsider viewers. It doesn't help that Ni represents about 25% of the population last I checked.

Ultimately cognitive functions are really just a sort of modus operandi, a method of operation. "Strength" is going to boil down to a huge variety of factors. Things like age, aptitude, experience, and mental exercise. Having a preferred method of operation doesn't imply having strength in that method. Typically, however, strength is acquired from use. By virtue of being a preferred method of operations, strength tends to grow.

That being said, if Ni user you are, you do seem to be a very capable one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by reckful View Post
Myers emphasized that there are a lot of personality characteristics that more than one of the MBTI dimensions can contribute to, and I'd say thinking before acting — as compared to shooting first, and asking questions later — is one of those.

In Gifts Differing, Myers noted that extraverts "often act quickly, sometimes without thinking," while introverts "like to think a lot before they act, sometimes without acting"; and separately referred to introverts' "characteristic pause before action, which extraverts carelessly call hesitation."
That's a really good distinction. I've never thought of it that way. Thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by reckful View Post
Moving to a more general issue, Ucenna has posted:

~snip that didn't copy over.~

Imma start by noting that the dichotomy-centric and function-centric MBTI perspectives are hardly "mutually exclusive," and that both involve "theory" — which I'm also quite fond of.
No, you're right. There's definitely a theory behind dichometrics. At the time I wasn't very aware of it and had lapsed to the idea of it simply being data. My understanding of the theory has grown some but is still rather sparse, so I can't and shouldn't speak for it.

As far as mutual exclusivity, I meant to separate the idea of dichometrics from cognitive functions. Given cognitive functions, I'd say there is a relationship between them and dichotomies. But I wouldn't say it's an explicit link, not exactly anyways. I'll touch on it more when we get to the functional stack. Mainly, dochotomy-centric and function-centric are two different approaches to MBTI. I wanted to make that distinction.
Mutual exclusivity isn't an accurate representation however. So it was a poor word choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reckful View Post
I'd say the distinction between the dichotomy-centric and function-centric MBTI theories is better framed as the difference between a theory that can point to a respectable amount of empirical support and a theory that can't.

Carl Jung (mystical streak notwithstanding) was a believer in the scientific approach, and Isabel Myers took Psychological Types and devoted a substantial chunk of her life to putting its typological concepts to the test in a way that Jung never had, and in accordance with the psychometric standards applicable to the science of personality.

And it's reasonably clear that Myers, despite quite a bit of lip service to Jung and the functions, came to understand (based on her many years of data-gathering) that the dichotomies were the essential components of Jungian/MBTI type.
I would make note that the existence of dichotomies doesn't imply the nonexistence of functions or vice versa. Functions(in my understanding) are more of a modus operandi than anything else. Certain dichometric inclinations will influence which functions are used. I would agree that between the two, dichotomies are the more essential in nature towards an MBTI type(so as to say, functions are dependent on dichotomies. Dichotomies influence which functions are favored. etc.). Functions do, however, seem to be closer to the human psyche in my mind. That being the case, I find them an excellent way to further understand the conscious/unconscious mind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reckful View Post
I agree with James Reynierse, an MBTI practitioner who has rightly (IMO) concluded — in a 2009 article ("The Case Against Type Dynamics") in the journal published by the official MBTI folks — that the eight faux-Jungian "cognitive functions" that people like Linda Berens love to talk about are best viewed as nothing more than a "category mistake."
I would agree that functions are a categorical mistake in so far as they are intrinsically different from dichotomies. However, I'd disagree that that aren't useful tools in understanding the human psyche.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reckful View Post
After you did some looking into the functions, you said you were "pleased to see the variations in a personality type which the cognitive functions accomodate, rather than the very hard and fast rules system of the dichotomies" — but that reflects a misunderstanding of what a dichotomy-centric perspective involves. Contrary to the notion that a function-centric perspective offers more richness and depth than a (properly framed) dichotomy-centric perspective, and as Reynierse explains in that linked article, it's actually the dichotomy-centric perspective that's richer and more flexible.
I was actually thinking of mentioning you. You're posts are some of the best representations of the dichotomy-centric view that I've seen. I don't want to misrepresent dichotomies to be thought of as inaccurate or unuseful. I know that I can't do them the justice they deserve, so I'm glad you came along.

Naturally, I might disagree as to which understanding is richer or more flexible. Honestly though, both views are valid and informative. Both, given a proper understanding, offer deep insight into the human psyche. I favor functions, but I don't think that dichotomies necessarily offer a less insightful viewpoint. Indeed, I've never observed them to do so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reckful View Post
The notion that an INFP has "tertiary Si," and will therefore tend (probabilistically speaking) to have "Si" aspects of personality in common with a typical ISTJ that ISTPs tend not to exhibit
I can't really offer a contrast for those specific types, but I have observed this tendency in other types. I find that my "Tertiary Ti" relates to the INTP and ENTPs I know. I've also noted an ENFP's "inferior SI" to manifest itself in ways resembling ISTJ's. I've also observed similarities between an ENFP's "Auxilary Fi" and an INTJ's "tertairy Fi". Or an INTP's "Inferior Fe" and an INFJ's "Auxilary Fe".

On the topic, I was curious for what your understanding of how unfavored dichotomies are expressed. I suppose in an INFJ having a strong F is going to suppress T's expression. But when T is expressed does it typically express itself in INTJ ways, or does it have an accent from the other suppressed dichotomies. The former seems to make more sense, but your experience may say otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by reckful View Post
And before I leave that subject, allow me to point out that the forum-famous model that says that INTJ=Ni-Te-Fi-Se and INTP=Ti-Ne-Si-Fe (and ZOMG, INTJs and INTPs have no functions in common) is the Harold Grant function stack — and it's a model that's inconsistent with Jung, inconsistent with Myers, and has never been endorsed by the official MBTI folks. More importantly, and unlike the respectable districts of the MBTI, that function stack has no substantial body of evidence behind it — and indeed, should probably be considered all but disproven at this point, given that the correlational patterns associated with it have stubbornly failed to show up in over 50 years of MBTI data pools.

The notion that, if you're a "Ti type," you're also an "Fe type" — and ditto for the Te/Fi, Ni/Se and Ne/Si pairs (the so-called "function axes," or "tandems") — is also a byproduct of the Grant model, and it's nonsense.
As promised.
I don't subscribe to any particular functions stack at this point. Though I have seen some signs of functional axes in people other than myself. I don't know that the relationship is explicit. It does seems to hold some ground in my observations. As such, I'm willing to accept it with a potential room for deviation. Yypically, I'd say strong Ni tends to suppress Si, Ti tends to suppress Fi, Fe tends to suppress Te, etc.
The typical axes, such as Fe supressing Ti, might also hold true (observation hasn't discounted them for me). However this would be crossing from Pe to Pi and from Je to Ji, and I'm not yet satisfied with my understanding of how those functions might counterbalance each other.
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th-January-2017, 11:46 AM   #34
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Well, reckful, that was quite a mouthful. (Sorry about the terrible wordplay. I couldn't resist.) It was a delight to see a fresh perspective of the MBTI system, as, on forums, I've mostly found people criticising the Dichotomies system and holding the Cognitive functions theory in high regard. I think that I probably would have become one of those people, had you not posted when you did. I made it a point to read through the links which you posted, and it changed my perspective. You must forgive me for the rather inexperienced statement I made earlier about cognitive functions being superior to the dichotomies. I'm merely an amateur to the world of Typology and MBTI. You seem to be very knowledgeable in this area. Would you, if possible, be able to provide me with how I would be able to identify whether I'm an Intuitive or a Sensor? I can't really trust myself to do an accurate self identification, as I think I'm always prone to being biased towards one of the two dichotomies, and in this case, I'm worried about wrongly typing myself as an Intuitive, even though I may be a sensor. I went through the official MBTI test link that you sent me, but I don't know if that would help me. At this point, I can pretty much identify which questions target which dichotomies, and I may, once again, be biased towards one or the other. Also, speaking of the Test, I had a question. Most of the questions targetted at the N/S dichotomy are more along the lines of 'What would you rather do?', rather than 'What DO you do?'. Couldn't this mess with the results? People like me, who like the idea of Intuition, may (consciously or unconsciously) choose answers which tend to Intuition.
Also, another question. My knowledge is rather limited as you can see. How does the Dichotomies system allow for variations within a personality type? For instance, an INTP with a well developed Feeling function. I don't mean this in an accusatory way; I'm genuinely curious.
Now, Ucenna, would you be able to explain to me how Ni can be distinguished from Si? Also, I'm not sure about whether I have Ni as a function, because everywhere I go, it talks about Ni having 'almost prophetic' or 'psychic' powers. And I don't really know if I have those 'aha' moments which were described in all articles/threads about Ni.
If it helps either one of you in your analysis, here's a little fact about me, which I've noticed through the years. When I'm with other people who I know we'll, I tend to adopt their mannerisms and general way of speaking, everything. Many INTPs have described themselves as 'chameleons'. I would rather describe it as a 'Cuttlefish'. They're better at camouflage, you see. When I'm around my ENTP friend, I tend to talk like him, and today I managed to predict one of his quirky statements before he made it. And sometimes, a few mannerisms of many people I've met over the years has sort of clung on to me and added to my own mannerisms when around others. A long time ago, I was almost disgusted at this characteristic of me, as I thought of it as indicative of having a shallow or no character. Now, however, I believe it hints at something deeper, which I'm not sure of entirely.
Well, let's end this post here..
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th-January-2017, 10:19 PM   #35
reckful
INTJ
 
reckful's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 89
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ucenna View Post
On the topic, I was curious for what your understanding of how unfavored dichotomies are expressed. I suppose in an INFJ having a strong F is going to suppress T's expression. But when T is expressed does it typically express itself in INTJ ways, or does it have an accent from the other suppressed dichotomies. The former seems to make more sense, but your experience may say otherwise.
Assuming that T and F represent the opposite sides of a personality dimension where, to the extent that one side is significantly favored, that means the other side is disfavored, and if you're dealing with an "INFJ having a strong F," then by definition you're dealing with an INFJ for whom the T side of things is "strongly" disfavored.

And what does it mean for one side of a personality dimension to be disfavored? I'd say there isn't a simple answer to that question, and that the answer may well be different, depending on which aspect/facet/whatever of that dimension you're focusing on. Statistics show that N's tend to be substantially more attracted to the arts than S's. So what should we expect that means when it comes to S's and the arts? Well, theoretically it could mean that S's are somehow averse to the arts, and tend to have negative feelings about the arts. That would be S as the true opposite of N, right? But it could theoretically also be the case that most S's find some arts at least slightly appealing, and pretty much just feel neutral about the others, with no real aversion there.

In other words, some personality dimensions — or aspects of personality dimensions — might involve spectrums where the 0 really belongs at the left end, and people in the middle have an average amount of whatever's involved (anxiety proneness, maybe, or interest in the arts), and people on the two "opposite" sides of that spectrum are less-than-average or more-than-average. And on the other hand, some personality dimensions — or aspects of personality dimensions — might involve spectrums where the 0 arguably belongs somewhere midstream, with people on the right side having more and more (as you move right) of something, and people on the left side having more and more (as you move left) of something else that is arguably better viewed as the opposite of the something on the right side.

I'd say the MBTI (in its dichotomy-centric and function-centric districts both) tends to characterize the two sides of its components more in terms of opposites — with the 0 in the middle, in other words — than in terms of involving simply more or less of some unipolar thing, and that was certainly the way Jung tended to frame things. But I'm very much open to the idea that there may be aspects (at least) of one or more of the MBTI dimensions that are more appropriately viewed as simply involving more and less of some one thing (with the 0 on the left, and middlish types being average).

And I'd say Big Five characterizations are a mix in that department. People on the left, middle and right areas of the Neuroticism spectrum tend to experience less-than-average, average, and above-average levels of anxiety, for example, while people on the left and right sides of the Agreeableness spectrum are sometimes said to be primarily competitive vs. primarily cooperative.

And the same analysis applies to personality characteristics associated with MBTI preference combinations. Here's some recycled reckful on SJs, NPs, and attitudes toward change:
I think attitude toward change is one of those cases where two of the MBTI dimensions can be viewed as contributing, each in its own way, to some aspect of personality. If you want to contrast change-oriented vs. tradition-oriented, I'd say S/N and J/P can each make a contribution, with SJs being the ultimate traditionalists (temperamentally over-pessimistic about change, and tending to over-value the way things are and/or "always have been"), NPs being the ultimate change agents (temperamentally over-optimistic about change, and prone to err on the side of having too little respect for established ways), and SPs and NJs being somewhere in between and arguably more realistic (about change). Maybe you could say that NJs are change agents, but more cautious and realistic about possible changes than the NPs; and that SPs are not that driven to be changers/innovators, but are more open to change (and less tradition-worshipping) than the SJs. In any case, I'd say NPs are the types most likely to end up itchy for a change just because it's "time for a change," and/or from a feeling that things have gotten stale and need to be stirred up to get life's vital juices flowing again, and/or from a feeling that the other grass usually is greener.
As a wrap-up, I'd say that, for a "strong F," it may be reasonable to expect that what's characteristic of their "T" stuff is that it involves some things appropriately described as weaknesses, some things appropriately described as aversions, and some things appropriately described as simply involving a below-average interest in certain things. And that's not intended to be a complete list of possible categories.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Would you, if possible, be able to provide me with how I would be able to identify whether I'm an Intuitive or a Sensor? I can't really trust myself to do an accurate self identification, as I think I'm always prone to being biased towards one of the two dichotomies, and in this case, I'm worried about wrongly typing myself as an Intuitive, even though I may be a sensor.
My first post linked you to a 10-post series at Typology Central, and the second post in that series, along with the other posts that it links to, has lots of input from me (and others) on what differentiates S's and N's — including a separate post on the "mystical Ni" issue.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
I went through the official MBTI test link that you sent me, but I don't know if that would help me. At this point, I can pretty much identify which questions target which dichotomies, and I may, once again, be biased towards one or the other. Also, speaking of the Test, I had a question. Most of the questions targetted at the N/S dichotomy are more along the lines of 'What would you rather do?', rather than 'What DO you do?'. Couldn't this mess with the results? People like me, who like the idea of Intuition, may (consciously or unconsciously) choose answers which tend to Intuition.
One of the reasons MBTI "preferences" are called preferences is because they tend to correspond to what you'd rather do (in terms of your natural inclinations) — i.e., to what I sometimes refer to as your temperamental tugs. As a reminder, my first post quoted some guidance from the MBTI Manual that explained that the test is trying to determine what your "natural preferences" are, when you're exhibiting what Myers called your "shoes-off self."

And as far as your "bias" goes... the fact that I know what the underlying theory is doesn't keep me from honestly answering test items, and I often respond to a number of the items in type-inconsistent ways. And sometimes I conclude that that reflects ways where I'm less than perfectly true-to-type, and sometimes I conclude that it's because the test item was kind of lame.

I've been participating in online type-me exercises for over seven years now, and they often involve people who are familiar with the theory and then take tests, and they understand which preferences most or all of the items are supposed to be getting at, but they still typically get less than "perfect" scores, and quite often come out pretty close to the middle.

Being able to "identify which questions target which dichotomies" really shouldn't get in the way of your choosing which side of each item you prefer. People who know the theory are certainly capable of gaming the test if they want to, but in my experience, they're also generally capable of not gaming the test if they don't want to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
How does the Dichotomies system allow for variations within a personality type? For instance, an INTP with a well developed Feeling function. I don't mean this in an accusatory way; I'm genuinely curious.
Both Jung and Myers thought that type was largely innate (inborn), but every perspective on Jungian/MBTI type I've ever encountered allows for the possibility of someone choosing to "develop" their less-favored sides in any number of ways.

I don't see that as an issue where a function-centric perspective offers more flexibility than a dichotomy-centric perspective.

Similarly, if your reference to a T with a "well developed" F is intended as a reference to a T who's closer to the middle of the T/F spectrum than another T with a "less well developed" (due to their innate temperament) T preference, then again, I also don't see that as an issue where a function-centric perspective "allows" for possibilities that a dichotomy-centric perspective rules out.

And in fact...

Let's say we've got an INFJ and an INFP before us. A functionista is going to maintain that the N is a greater influence on the INFJ's personality than the F, and vice versa for the INFP, because of the dom/aux aspect of type dynamics. But a dichotomy-centric analyst who subscribes to what I call the Real MBTI Model will say that whether N or F is a greater influence will depend on whether the strength of the applicable preferences is notably different, and that either type (INFJ or INFP) is capable of having a strong N preference and a middlish F preference or vice versa.

There's an example of the dichotomy-centric perspective allowing for more flexibility — when it comes to "variations within a personality type" — than the function-centric perspective.
reckful is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st-January-2017, 10:38 AM   #36
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by reckful View Post
Assuming that T and F represent the opposite sides of a personality dimension where, to the extent that one side is significantly favored, that means the other side is disfavored, and if you're dealing with an "INFJ having a strong F," then by definition you're dealing with an INFJ for whom the T side of things is "strongly" disfavored.

And what does it mean for one side of a personality dimension to be disfavored? I'd say there isn't a simple answer to that question, and that the answer may well be different, depending on which aspect/facet/whatever of that dimension you're focusing on. Statistics show that N's tend to be substantially more attracted to the arts than S's. So what should we expect that means when it comes to S's and the arts? Well, theoretically it could mean that S's are somehow averse to the arts, and tend to have negative feelings about the arts. That would be S as the true opposite of N, right? But it could theoretically also be the case that most S's find some arts at least slightly appealing, and pretty much just feel neutral about the others, with no real aversion there.

In other words, some personality dimensions — or aspects of personality dimensions — might involve spectrums where the 0 really belongs at the left end, and people in the middle have an average amount of whatever's involved (anxiety proneness, maybe, or interest in the arts), and people on the two "opposite" sides of that spectrum are less-than-average or more-than-average. And on the other hand, some personality dimensions — or aspects of personality dimensions — might involve spectrums where the 0 arguably belongs somewhere midstream, with people on the right side having more and more (as you move right) of something, and people on the left side having more and more (as you move left) of something else that is arguably better viewed as the opposite of the something on the right side.

I'd say the MBTI (in its dichotomy-centric and function-centric districts both) tends to characterize the two sides of its components more in terms of opposites — with the 0 in the middle, in other words — than in terms of involving simply more or less of some unipolar thing, and that was certainly the way Jung tended to frame things. But I'm very much open to the idea that there may be aspects (at least) of one or more of the MBTI dimensions that are more appropriately viewed as simply involving more and less of some one thing (with the 0 on the left, and middlish types being average).

And I'd say Big Five characterizations are a mix in that department. People on the left, middle and right areas of the Neuroticism spectrum tend to experience less-than-average, average, and above-average levels of anxiety, for example, while people on the left and right sides of the Agreeableness spectrum are sometimes said to be primarily competitive vs. primarily cooperative.

And the same analysis applies to personality characteristics associated with MBTI preference combinations. Here's some recycled reckful on SJs, NPs, and attitudes toward change:
I think attitude toward change is one of those cases where two of the MBTI dimensions can be viewed as contributing, each in its own way, to some aspect of personality. If you want to contrast change-oriented vs. tradition-oriented, I'd say S/N and J/P can each make a contribution, with SJs being the ultimate traditionalists (temperamentally over-pessimistic about change, and tending to over-value the way things are and/or "always have been"), NPs being the ultimate change agents (temperamentally over-optimistic about change, and prone to err on the side of having too little respect for established ways), and SPs and NJs being somewhere in between and arguably more realistic (about change). Maybe you could say that NJs are change agents, but more cautious and realistic about possible changes than the NPs; and that SPs are not that driven to be changers/innovators, but are more open to change (and less tradition-worshipping) than the SJs. In any case, I'd say NPs are the types most likely to end up itchy for a change just because it's "time for a change," and/or from a feeling that things have gotten stale and need to be stirred up to get life's vital juices flowing again, and/or from a feeling that the other grass usually is greener.
As a wrap-up, I'd say that, for a "strong F," it may be reasonable to expect that what's characteristic of their "T" stuff is that it involves some things appropriately described as weaknesses, some things appropriately described as aversions, and some things appropriately described as simply involving a below-average interest in certain things. And that's not intended to be a complete list of possible categories.
Thank you. When I first read your posts, it shook my understanding of MBTI. I initially decided to further develop my understanding of function theory before delving into dichotomy theory, least I further confuse myself. I'd same I'm relatively satisfied with my understanding of functions, so I'm going to start further examining the dichotomy side of things.

I'll probably be reading a lot of your posts in the future. There very information and theory rich. I wonder, do you have a centralized depot of information. Most of your posts seem scattered in random threads.

On to theory. Upon further consideration I'm going to have to retract my statement that functions and dichotomies offer an equal explanation for the human psyche. This is because I've reexamined my understanding as to how each plays a role in the human psyche. My current understanding is that dichotomies influence which functions a given person prefers. And since dichotomies influence functions, it's possible and maybe even probable that dichotomies also influence elements of the psyche that are not related to functions. That primarily depends on whether or not the eight functions successfully encompass the entirety of the human psyche. I haven't decided for certain, but currently the scale does lean towards dichotomies for that.

Besides the relationship between S/N and P/J, I've also noticed similarly conducive traits between N and F/T. Actually, the whole F vs T thing bothers me. Anyways, it seems difficult to attach F's values and emotions to N related things. N's focus is by definition on the intangible. Where as S's focus on the tangible gives something for F to latch on to. T conversely,s seems impartial. It can easily be connected to either S or N. I wonder if this might be why INFs have a tendency to mistype as Ts. But I digress, I'll have to do more reading.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Now, Ucenna, would you be able to explain to me how Ni can be distinguished from Si? Also, I'm not sure about whether I have Ni as a function, because everywhere I go, it talks about Ni having 'almost prophetic' or 'psychic' powers. And I don't really know if I have those 'aha' moments which were described in all articles/threads about Ni.
If you haven't read reckful's description on S and N, I'd recommend it. It's a good read, and it offers a useful contrast. The main difference between Si and Ni is S and N after all.

Both Si and Ni are worldview functions. They build a "map" of reality. Si's map is built off the concrete; events, things, reality as it is. Ni's map is built off the abstract; patterns, thoughts, ideas. Si is often confused with memory, because for Si it's map is predominantly composed of the things it's experienced in the past. When looking at something, like a cup, Si's map will show it all the concrete things about it. How bright the paint was when the cup was first bought. How it feels to hold when the cup has been filled with hot tea. How they accidentally dropped it many moons ago and it got that chip in the corner.
Also Si tends to compound on itself, hence it's tendency towards ritualism and tradition. If the have a favorable experience with the cup they're likely to spend more time with it, thus creating new experiences.

Ni's map, when looking at a cup is going to be more abstract. Actually, cups are S's domain, so N isn't really too interested in it. But for the sake of example. How the cup being on the table must mean that someone put it there. How the chip in it's corner implies it was dropped in it's past. How the presence of warm tea with in it implies that someone was using it recently (unless the room is really, really hot. Then Ni realizes the tea is warm because the room is hot.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
If it helps either one of you in your analysis, here's a little fact about me, which I've noticed through the years. When I'm with other people who I know we'll, I tend to adopt their mannerisms and general way of speaking, everything. Many INTPs have described themselves as 'chameleons'. I would rather describe it as a 'Cuttlefish'. They're better at camouflage, you see. When I'm around my ENTP friend, I tend to talk like him, and today I managed to predict one of his quirky statements before he made it. And sometimes, a few mannerisms of many people I've met over the years has sort of clung on to me and added to my own mannerisms when around others. A long time ago, I was almost disgusted at this characteristic of me, as I thought of it as indicative of having a shallow or no character. Now, however, I believe it hints at something deeper, which I'm not sure of entirely.
Well, let's end this post here..
Things like this were the main indicator of F for me. Also attaching value to things such as being shallow or without character is also indicative of F to me.

Edit: @reckful As far as tests and how knowing what each answer applies, I'm going to have to disagree with you. I think it can effect your test scores. Maybe it's just an F thing or an Fe/FJ thing, but the shoes off me is very similar to the person I want to be. It's an almost subconscious decision. "If N is better than S, I should focus more on using N traits. I am now more N." And now the shoes off me appears to be more N.
Sometimes I find it difficult to detach me from my self image. I know that the image is there blocking my view, but it's difficult for me to remove. That's why I'm also reluctant to take tests.
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st-January-2017, 10:34 PM   #37
Artsu Tharaz
Resident Resident
 
Artsu Tharaz's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: /~\
Posts: 2,502
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

I was becoming convinced of the dichotomy-based perspective too, but I'm going back over to the functions-based one. Dichotomies may be more flexible, but that's kinda useless if you're not getting the basic theory as close to how things manifest.

Yes, from a functions perspetive, INFP inherently has a stronger F preference than N preference when compared with an INFJ, although this won't necessarily show up in test scores. Whether it does or not depends on how aware the person is of their preferences.
Artsu Tharaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd-January-2017, 02:08 PM   #38
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Okay, I realised that I may have been bothering some of you (particularly Ucenna) with my endless stream of questions. I think I'll retract now for a while and peruse some interesting threads, maybe watch some videos too. (I've been watching a lot of Michael Pierce recently. I'm not sure of the accuracy of his videos, but I enjoy them, nevertheless.) And yes, reckful, I have been reading your posts, and I find them to be very informative and insightful. All of you are welcome to provide any insights on anything Typology related here, and I'll probably even read it, but I'll be responding only much later, when I've gained more clarity on this.
Well, a short Goodbye for now, then!
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th-January-2017, 08:27 AM   #39
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Artsu Tharaz View Post
I was becoming convinced of the dichotomy-based perspective too, but I'm going back over to the functions-based one. Dichotomies may be more flexible, but that's kinda useless if you're not getting the basic theory as close to how things manifest.
Well dichotomies still explain how they manifest. If you think of the characteristics of N and consider how they'd interact with the characteristics of P, you're going to have someone that shares many of the characteristics of Ne. Dichotomies do explain everything in their way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Okay, I realised that I may have been bothering some of you (particularly Ucenna) with my endless stream of questions. I think I'll retract now for a while and peruse some interesting threads, maybe watch some videos too. (I've been watching a lot of Michael Pierce recently. I'm not sure of the accuracy of his videos, but I enjoy them, nevertheless.) And yes, reckful, I have been reading your posts, and I find them to be very informative and insightful. All of you are welcome to provide any insights on anything Typology related here, and I'll probably even read it, but I'll be responding only much later, when I've gained more clarity on this.
Well, a short Goodbye for now, then!
it's no problem. I 'm happy to have been of service. I hope I was able to provide something useful in my mess of text.
Good luck! Welcome to the rabbit hole!
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th-January-2017, 01:10 PM   #40
Artsu Tharaz
Resident Resident
 
Artsu Tharaz's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: /~\
Posts: 2,502
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ucenna
Well dichotomies still explain how they manifest. If you think of the characteristics of N and consider how they'd interact with the characteristics of P, you're going to have someone that shares many of the characteristics of Ne. Dichotomies do explain everything in their way.
The problem is with the tertiary/inferior functions. The dichotomies don't quite explain why there would be appearances of the opposite functions in a given type, unless perhaps you go by the assumption that 2 unfavoured dichotomies make a semi-favoured dichotomy, i.e. that N+P (Ne) implies that, say, S+J (Si) will manifest more strongly than S+P (Se).

Also, if the dichotomy based approach covers the functions approach, then I would like to see someone describe the other dichotomy pairs, like there should be another set of 8 functions that could be made from I+N etc.
Artsu Tharaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th-January-2017, 02:32 PM   #41
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Well, I'm back, and yes, it hasn't been very long. I've come to realise that forums are the best resources to solve problems like the one which I'm confronted by now.
My problem is with Si. Unless my understanding of Si is flawed, I've realised that I prefer Si. In my case, Si would have to be either a dominant or a tertiary function. Since I'm almost completely sure of Ti-Fe, if Si is dominant, then it would imply that Ti is tertiary. This is what I have a problem with. I wouldn't lower Ti all the way to the tertiary position. In the case of tertiary Si, I'm not sure of how Si manifests in an INTP's behaviour. I'm fairly certain that I exhibit characteristics of Si. When I drift off, I often begin to think of past experiences, sometimes in relation to something that had happened in the outer world. Either that or my understanding of Si is flawed. Is it possible to have an ISFJ with such strong tertiary Ti that he/she/other seems like a Ti dominant?
By now, I'm almost completely sure of my Ti-Fe. The problem is that both INTPs and ISFJs share the same functional stacks. And, coincidentally, I relate to the qualities of both..
On the whole, however, these seem to indicate INTP, but for one thing- Ne..
Extraverted Intuition has only added to the overall confusion. I'm really not sure about it. When I read about it as a function alone, I'm almost positive of it lacking in me. But when I read about the INTPs in general, I can relate to the descriptions (mostly). Another alternative is that I've been using Ne, so now I just take its presence for granted, and therefore don't recognise it when I read about it. This seems less likely, however.
Later, I had a moment of revelation (of sorts) when I was reading an article, which spoke about how Se remembers details objectively, while Si remembers them subjectively.
I then proceeded to wonder, what if what I'm doing is remembering the facts/experiences using Se, and then brooding over it with subjective Ni? Could this be possible? Would any of you Ni-doms be able to explain this?

Looking at this from a dichotomies perspective, I would clearly be an INTP. My introversion is certain. I'm not a J, therefore P. I would have a preference of Thinking over Feeling, so T. N/S would be questionable, but since ISTP doesn't really resonate with me at all, I should be an INTP.
But every time I seem to settle on something, doubt starts nagging me again. It's... well, just a feeling of discomfort. Like something is being left incomplete..
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd-February-2017, 08:23 AM   #42
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
Well, I'm back, and yes, it hasn't been very long. I've come to realise that forums are the best resources to solve problems like the one which I'm confronted by now.
My problem is with Si. Unless my understanding of Si is flawed, I've realised that I prefer Si. In my case, Si would have to be either a dominant or a tertiary function. Since I'm almost completely sure of Ti-Fe, if Si is dominant, then it would imply that Ti is tertiary. This is what I have a problem with. I wouldn't lower Ti all the way to the tertiary position. In the case of tertiary Si, I'm not sure of how Si manifests in an INTP's behaviour. I'm fairly certain that I exhibit characteristics of Si. When I drift off, I often begin to think of past experiences, sometimes in relation to something that had happened in the outer world. Either that or my understanding of Si is flawed. Is it possible to have an ISFJ with such strong tertiary Ti that he/she/other seems like a Ti dominant?
By now, I'm almost completely sure of my Ti-Fe. The problem is that both INTPs and ISFJs share the same functional stacks. And, coincidentally, I relate to the qualities of both..
On the whole, however, these seem to indicate INTP, but for one thing- Ne..
Extraverted Intuition has only added to the overall confusion. I'm really not sure about it. When I read about it as a function alone, I'm almost positive of it lacking in me. But when I read about the INTPs in general, I can relate to the descriptions (mostly). Another alternative is that I've been using Ne, so now I just take its presence for granted, and therefore don't recognise it when I read about it. This seems less likely, however.
Later, I had a moment of revelation (of sorts) when I was reading an article, which spoke about how Se remembers details objectively, while Si remembers them subjectively.
I then proceeded to wonder, what if what I'm doing is remembering the facts/experiences using Se, and then brooding over it with subjective Ni? Could this be possible? Would any of you Ni-doms be able to explain this?

Looking at this from a dichotomies perspective, I would clearly be an INTP. My introversion is certain. I'm not a J, therefore P. I would have a preference of Thinking over Feeling, so T. N/S would be questionable, but since ISTP doesn't really resonate with me at all, I should be an INTP.
But every time I seem to settle on something, doubt starts nagging me again. It's... well, just a feeling of discomfort. Like something is being left incomplete..
I apologize for the slow reply. I've been meaning to get back to you, but time has gotten away from me.

So Ti dominant vs Ti tertiary. Well firstly, I have to agree with reckful, the commonly used functional stack of NiFeTiSe isn't necessarily accurate. I don't mean to say it isn't, it might be, it seems to be for me. But I wouldn't ascribe to it just because it's most commonly used. There are alternatives. The original Jungian stack was NiTiFeSe. Socionics uses who knows what order to stack functions. There's a lot of ways to interpret it.

There was a time that I was seriously considering rejecting the current model because my functions seemed to stack NiTiFeSe, but I've since become more aware of my Fe and changed my views. The typical model is solid enough, and it can be useful. But if you feel the need to consider alternative stacks or ideas, don't let it hold you back.

As for Ni. Well I still get a Ni vibe from you, but I have mistyped strong Si users before. I don't have much to add from what I've already said, but I will note that both are past focused. This is why Ni and Si are both considered subjective. They're perspective is fueled and developed by past events, and everyone's past is different. Because Si is more based in tangible characteristics such as appearance, texture, and emotional response; it's bound more closely to the tangible aspect of memory.
Ni conversely, is based on the abstract characteristics of memory; patterns, ideas, connections. So it's more bound to the abstract aspects of memory.

In my brief bits of research, Si seems to be more close to the idea of reliving or reexperience a memory or aspect of it. I suspect that when Si views an object, it natural resurfaces and experience bits and pieces of past memories of that object. Nostalgia is the word. My Si friend for example has lots of quirks. One of which is that he won't drink tea. It reminds him of his Grandma's tea, which tasted particularly foul to him. Another Si friend won't watch RWBY even after much begging, because she watched a particular series by the same director and didn't like it.
Ni can exhibit this behavior too, but it's much less common and rarely expressed to the degree seen above. To further indicate the magnitude, that second friend who is probably a Si dom, will quite possibly dislike RWBY if she watched it, because of her past experience with the director. I personally didn't ask her to watch it much, because I knew begging would only further spoil her impression of it.

Ni is going to experience memory like Si, but not quite in the same way and not quite as pronounced. It seems to me that Si takes a additive approach to perception, each event adds onto the overall impression of the object. Ni takes a more subtractive approach. It tends to compare and contrast 2 events to find the differences and connections between them. To get a sense of an overarching pattern. When perceiving something, it assembles an idea out of the patterns it observes in the object. Usually, when analysing a memory, I'm actively looking for patterns and connections in it.
Still we live in the physical world, so NIs patterns and connections are based in it. When observing a pattern in the present, I might also bring up memories of times I've observed that pattern in the past. Or when thinking of a pattern in a memory, I might also recall other memories where that pattern is present.
And pattern is a confusing word. It's not like I'm being all mathy or anything. My Fe is pretty strong, so my patterns are people oriented. As an example, I might walk my self through an old old memory or interacting with someone. As I walk myself through it, my Ni will find everything I know about that person, all the connections in body language for that person,l. My Ni will also bring up all the patterns of human interaction I know, what different emotions look like and stuff. As I walk myself through particularly old memories, my Ni, which now has more experience than it once did, can sometimes figure new things out and better understand the given memory.(though I suspect Si, has a similar ability to glean new information from old memories)

I hope my rambling was of some service. I did my best.
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd-February-2017, 12:40 PM   #43
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

No problem with the delay!

It's definitely an interesting concept- stacking functions in a different manner from the usual Jungian functions method.
I can understand the difficulty in trying to differentiate Si and Ni. It seems to me that every website I visit has different interpretations of Ni, but one common description running through all the websites was that of Ni's 'prophetic' quality, which was probably what made me disregard it as one of my functions, in the first place. Ni always seems to have this mystical description, which paints INFJs as mysterious, Gandalf-like people. I do occasionally feel as though I'm the only one thinking of something at a particular time, but I believe that that happens to all of us, at some point or the other. I've noticed the so-called 'INFJ special snowflake syndrome' on multiple forums online, and this was what REALLY made me disregard Ni, although I now realise that those were probably largely pretences on the parts of those posters.
Si isn't exactly explained too well either..
Maybe a few examples of what I mean by remembering past experiences will help you confirm or discard your suspicion of my Ni.

Today, somebody who is part of the, well, 'popular gang' in class was nominated for a high post. I saw him looking really dejected later on, and I thought of how that was really similar to the predicament of Major Major Major Major (no, I did not accidentally type 'Major' four times in a row) in Catch 22, when he was promoted to Squadron commander. Earlier, he would play basketball with the other soldiers, and had whatever little fun he could have. However, now that he was superior to the other soldiers, they did not try to stop him from scoring, or tackle him, or anything of the sort. He did not belong anymore.
Similarly, this guy who was nominated probably felt like he was isolated from his group. It isn't actually that dire, but I could see the resemblance between the two.

Another example:

When I was about halfway through this VERY interesting link:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/big...a-brexit-trump

I realised that the person who is the focus of the article, Michal Kosinki, is in a similar predicament to Albert Einstein, whose research was wrongfully used for the creation of the Atomic bomb. By the way, I highly recommend reading that article. It's one of the most interesting things I've read in a long time.
Sure enough, at the end of the article, Michal Kosinki says this:
" I did not build the bomb. I only showed that it exists."

Even if this indicates Ni to you, I've read descriptions talking about how Ni is always forward focused, and future oriented. I'm not sure how much that applies to me, though. Sometimes, I do think of what may happen, but not on the level at which it's often described.
To add, I'm also not entirely sure of my ability to 'read' people, like I've heard people say.
At this point, I'm not even sure of my Intuitive-ness, and it's driving me crazy. I constantly find parts of my behaviour which correspond to Sensing dominant/auxiliary, and Intuition dominant/auxiliary.

Thanks for sticking on this forum for such a long time, though, through all of my (often stupid) questions!
Your explanation is definitely not the problem here. I think that it's just the fact that both Si and Ni are so abstract that it's difficult to put into words, how they work.
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th-February-2017, 04:04 AM   #44
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Berkana Re: Self typing help, please!

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flycatcher View Post
No problem with the delay!

It's definitely an interesting concept- stacking functions in a different manner from the usual Jungian functions method.
I can understand the difficulty in trying to differentiate Si and Ni. It seems to me that every website I visit has different interpretations of Ni, but one common description running through all the websites was that of Ni's 'prophetic' quality, which was probably what made me disregard it as one of my functions, in the first place. Ni always seems to have this mystical description, which paints INFJs as mysterious, Gandalf-like people. I do occasionally feel as though I'm the only one thinking of something at a particular time, but I believe that that happens to all of us, at some point or the other. I've noticed the so-called 'INFJ special snowflake syndrome' on multiple forums online, and this was what REALLY made me disregard Ni, although I now realise that those were probably largely pretences on the parts of those posters.
Si isn't exactly explained too well either..
Maybe a few examples of what I mean by remembering past experiences will help you confirm or discard your suspicion of my Ni.

Today, somebody who is part of the, well, 'popular gang' in class was nominated for a high post. I saw him looking really dejected later on, and I thought of how that was really similar to the predicament of Major Major Major Major (no, I did not accidentally type 'Major' four times in a row) in Catch 22, when he was promoted to Squadron commander. Earlier, he would play basketball with the other soldiers, and had whatever little fun he could have. However, now that he was superior to the other soldiers, they did not try to stop him from scoring, or tackle him, or anything of the sort. He did not belong anymore.
Similarly, this guy who was nominated probably felt like he was isolated from his group. It isn't actually that dire, but I could see the resemblance between the two.

Another example:

When I was about halfway through this VERY interesting link:

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/big...a-brexit-trump

I realised that the person who is the focus of the article, Michal Kosinki, is in a similar predicament to Albert Einstein, whose research was wrongfully used for the creation of the Atomic bomb. By the way, I highly recommend reading that article. It's one of the most interesting things I've read in a long time.
Sure enough, at the end of the article, Michal Kosinki says this:
" I did not build the bomb. I only showed that it exists."

Even if this indicates Ni to you, I've read descriptions talking about how Ni is always forward focused, and future oriented. I'm not sure how much that applies to me, though. Sometimes, I do think of what may happen, but not on the level at which it's often described.
To add, I'm also not entirely sure of my ability to 'read' people, like I've heard people say.
At this point, I'm not even sure of my Intuitive-ness, and it's driving me crazy. I constantly find parts of my behaviour which correspond to Sensing dominant/auxiliary, and Intuition dominant/auxiliary.

Thanks for sticking on this forum for such a long time, though, through all of my (often stupid) questions!
Your explanation is definitely not the problem here. I think that it's just the fact that both Si and Ni are so abstract that it's difficult to put into words, how they work.
Welp! Another late reply! Sorry!

Ni mainly appears prophetic and Gandalf-y to non Ni users. Strong Ni users often don't find their insights unusual. Often, they feel what they see is obvious and are more surprised when others don't feel the same. That has been my experience anyway.

As far as special snowflake syndrome, I also find it annoying. I think it's important to note that functions are focused on cognition and how information is processed. Feeling special, or desiring to feel special is something that lies more within other personality theories such as enneagram or instinctual variants.

As far as your examples go, it's still difficult to say. Both Si and Ni are going to reference past information. It ultimately boils down to how that information is interpreted. Referencing a past idea could be because you're seeing and verifying a connection, or because you're seeing and verifying an impression. I suppose that isn't too helpful, because they can often feel like they are one and the same when observed.

You might try to search for examples of Ni and Si use. Ni examples tend to stick out to me, but Si users I've noticed tend to be rather vague/difficult to understand in there explanations.

Also, I managed to find a very good explanation for Si that does a far better job than I could: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/commen...rtiary/czo31sb
Komatik in general seems to do a good job describing Si and other functions. He also did short descriptions for all the functions that differentiates them very well: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/commen...ng_the/cr9u0aj
Honestly, just google his username and "mbti" and you're sure to get a lot of good information.

As for your type, I still want to learn towards INFJ but there are other possibilities. Let's see if we can't eliminate some. At the moment we're looking at IxTP and IxFJ, right? I think, it might be worth throwing ENTP in there just in case. I know you're pretty certain you're an introvert, but I still haven't completely thrown out the possibility.

Ji dom(IxxP):
Ji doms are more decisive in my experience. They aren't always fast to make a personal decision, but once they do they're very set in it. So set that they can get angry or upset if that idea is challenge too much. However if you can prove them wrong on their own grounds, they can be more open minded. The key here is Ji, which makes decisions. As a Pi dom, I'm much slower to actually accept and solidify an opinion. And when I do, I'm somewhat more open minded when offered alternative view points. I'm more willing to perceive and integrate new information rather than just shut it down.

Pi dom (ixxJ):
Pi doms observe first and foremost. However unlike, Pe they tend to be more focused on fleshing out their ideas/thoughts/observations. For me this manifests itself in constant imagining things or reliving past experiences. Just watching how things interact according to my understanding of them and hopefully growing from it. Pi learns more the more information it has present, and tends to grow aggressively from experience. Pretty much every Si dom I know is level headed and thoughtful. They give you insight without forming an opinion as quickly as a Ji would. Also, as for my person experience making Ji judgements, I notice that I tend to try them on for size before accepting them. I test them, watch them interact with my understanding of the world. I temper them, and make sure they're strong before integrating them.

Pe dom (ExxP):
This'll be interesting, considering this Is my inferior. Pe is the most present, either in the realm of ideas or the realm of reality. Unlike Pi, it's not as reflective. It prefers to just flow with the world around it and not dwell on the past as much. But that doesn't mean it won't. Pe doms, Ne doms in particular often draw connections with past events. However they dont spend much time fixating on them. Instead they just let them flow in and then out, as new ideas or thoughts come to take their place.

Je dom (ExxJ):
You're not a Je dom. At least I don't think. They tend to be more action focused interacting with the world and very much in the moment acting. Because Ji is their inferior function, I'd have to say that they are probably more effective by the present than other types(though this is just a theory). They take in the present world, observe it with Pi and Pe and then respond to it. Personal decisions via Ji can take some time to make, because it is the function they are least interested in.

I hope that helped in some way.

Also, are you on Discord? A live chat would probably be more helpful for information exchange, and I know a few MBTI chatrooms that you might be interested in.
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd-February-2017, 08:29 AM   #45
The Flycatcher
Redshirt
 

Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 17
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Well, I can see why you emphasized on the need for a live chat. I feel like these late responses (from both ends) are somehow just diluting the intensity of the conversation we're having.
Well, I am on Discord now, but you'll probably have to run me through how all of this works, as this is the first time I'm doing something like this.

The problem is, people don't see me as prophetic either. I'm mostly seen by those around me as somewhat unfeeling, introverted (for sure - also why I'll definitely rule out ENTP as a possibility), and, as I've been told recently, emotionally detached, but not as much as my friend, who I suspect is an INTP (or INTJ - I can't seem to figure out Ti or Te- therefore maybe even ISTJ).

So, Ni examples-
I couldn't really find too many, but I'll tell what I couldn't relate to, and what I could relate to.
So, I read this comment by an INFJ (I think it was on Typology Central), where they said that they often had powerful metaphorical visions appear to them at times which would tell them what was to come. The example they used was of a conversation that was going badly, but then, they saw a vision of a sun emerging from behind the clouds, and the conversation consequently improved.
I can't relate to this, and, honestly, I'm not sure how much it ties in with Ni use, but whether it does or not, I can safely say that this hasn't happened to me.

What I CAN relate to, is the red balloon example which Michael Pierce uses to illustrate Ni use. In fact, when I watched the video at first, I couldn't really relate, but I figured out later, that I've actually been doing that all the time, and I've identified it in myself. Here's a link, in case you haven't watched his video:


Komatik is awesome! I first spotted him on a Michael Pierce video, and I now regard him as a crusader for Sensors in general, after I saw him putting forth some valuable points in favour of Sensors, and also breaking down the Intuitive Bias.

His post on Si was an interesting read. I can relate to some aspects of Si, but not all. For instance, if something has worked once, I probably won't hesitate to use the same method again.
But here is something that probably doesn't agree with what I've stated above. Back in high school, we were asked to make a quiz (for fun), for the rest of the class to attempt. One of the topics was wildlife. Now, while, I can imagine, the stereotypical introverted sensor would go with what has worked earlier (for example, objective questions such as: What is the largest animal, etc.), I wanted to do something different. So, I made a question wherein I gave them about five animal species living in the same area, and told them to arrange them all into a food web.
So, either this is Ni, or it is inferior Ne.

Out of the perceiving functions' descriptions that you've mentioned, I relate most to the Pi style of decision making. However, I wouldn't want to discard Ji right away (Ti in particular). Pe and Je are the two I definitely cannot relate to, so those are out.

Also, if I could figure out if I use Se or Ne, I could easily figure out what my type is. But I don't know if there's a way to figure out what my inferior function is.

So, thanks, and, hopefully, I'll figure out the mechanics of Discord soon. I will, of course, require some details from you.
The Flycatcher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th-February-2017, 11:14 PM   #46
Ucenna
Member
 

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 38
linuxsafari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

Yeah no problem!
I'll send you a PM with discord stuff.

I've always been confused by some Ni's description of Ni as well. I suppose some people use it differently, but I've always been skeptical of the creative imagery they use.

Also, thanks for the video. It was a good watch. I actually haven't seen any Michael Pierce, but I've heard people swear by him.
Ucenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th-February-2017, 11:35 PM   #47
QuickTwist
Man of few words
 
QuickTwist's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: The keen war front.
Posts: 5,230
windows_98_nt_2000safari
Default Re: Self typing help, please!

T/F is a fallacy. Our minds use emotions all the time to inform our logical brain and bodies, not the other way around. This is the case for everyone on earth.
__________________
QuickTwist is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
typing my gf booksandstuff MBTI & Typology 5 19th-October-2015 01:56 AM
Help with self-typing? Meishrooms MBTI & Typology 3 19th-February-2015 04:47 PM
Help typing me, please Zakoon MBTI & Typology Archive 13 8th-January-2013 06:00 AM
Need help typing someone M... MBTI & Typology Archive 7 6th-June-2011 04:16 PM
I need some help with typing Yozuki MBTI & Typology Archive 1 18th-February-2009 05:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:37 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Template-Modifications by TMS
no new posts