Do I know my self or not?

[QuickTwist]

I have recently been typed as anywhere from ISTP to ISTJ by certain individuals, and one person even thought I was an ESFJ so there is a dilemma because based on all the Myers Briggs test I have take inform me that I am either INTJ, unofficial and includes most of the tests I have taken, or INTP which includes 2 official tests.

This may be subjective, but I would like to point out that I have never been popular if that helps you type me if you choose to do so.

Does further testing need to be done? Which source should I use if that is the case? I have heard of a test where they test you based on visual queues as well as how you answer the questions. Would this be a viable option and how much would htat cost?

 

[Obsidian]

Post a video of yourself on youtube and I am sure certain people will be willing to attempt it for free

 

[Analyzer]

Seems like you have Ti and Ni...my guess ISTP.

Just my opinion.

 

[Ink]

Post a video of yourself on youtube and I am sure certain people will be willing to attempt it for free

Seems like you have Ti and Ni...my guess ISTP.

Just my opinion.

Seconded

 

[Obsidian]

Based on the picture, I was guessing INTJ or ISTP -- for what it's worth.

 

[Montresor]

I absolutely do not think you are ISTP sorry.

ISTJ.

 

[Ink]

I absolutely do not think you are ISTP sorry.

ISTJ.

Haha, why is that? We need a video to put an end to this ...

 

[Montresor]

No seriously I read your post in the "Biggest Meanies" thread you are cut and dry ISTJ see if I'm wrong seriously prove me wrong. I can see it in your face and in your writing.


Edit: Well no I could be wrong. I take it back. Sorry. Leaving now.

 

[wonkavision]

I have recently been typed as anywhere from ISTP to ISTJ by certain individuals, and one person even thought I was an ESFJ so there is a dilemma because based on all the Myers Briggs test I have take inform me that I am either INTJ, unofficial and includes most of the tests I have taken, or INTP which includes 2 official tests.

This may be subjective, but I would like to point out that I have never been popular if that helps you type me if you choose to do so.

Does further testing need to be done? Which source should I use if that is the case? I have heard of a test where they test you based on visual queues as well as how you answer the questions. Would this be a viable option and how much would htat cost?

I don't know what your type is, but I would suggest getting your Mojo read by the Pod'Lair people.

Weird terminolgy and culty vibe aside, I found their analysis pretty helpful.

 

[QuickTwist]

B-I-N-G-O

 

[Nameless01]

Based on the picture, I was guessing INTJ or ISTP -- for what it's worth.

This, INTJ. The vacant eyes with slightly meany look and need/want to be INTP gives it away.


No offense.

 

[Hadoblado]

Bwahahaha

 

[QuickTwist]

@Nameless01, Wow, 7 posts and you already have me pegged... you must be something else.

@Hadoblado, Interesting analysis. How did you arrive at that conclusion?

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I have a weak impression but I think NeTi, or maybe SiTe, can't really explain.

If your enneagram type is more e7/e3/e8 then NeTi.
If e5/e9 then SiTe(or the laid back ISTx type).

 

[QuickTwist]

My Enneagram is a 3. What would that mean?

 

[redbaron]

It means you're allergic to watermelon.

 

[Montresor]

If we're typing you based your picture, it's easy. INTJ.

You have the exact same neutral expression as my friend who I am 100% sure is INTJ.

That's why I backed out and figured I was wrong before.

I think you are ISTJ because a true INTJ would be more reasonable and intelligent, and probably wouldn't give people advice the same way you do. I think your approach has more of a Si than an Ni feel,

No doubt on Te aux tho.

 

[QuickTwist]

If we're typing you based your picture, it's easy. INTJ.

You have the exact same neutral expression as my friend who I am 100% sure is INTJ.

That's why I backed out and figured I was wrong before.

You didn't communicate that in the slightest when you made your edit which leads me to believe you could be making this argument up. My guess is that you saw that no one else is labeling me an SJ so you decided to bail.

I think you are ISTJ because a true INTJ would be more reasonable and intelligent, and probably wouldn't give people advice the same way you do. I think your approach has more of a Si than an Ni feel,

No doubt on Te aux tho.

I am plenty reaonable, you just don't know me that well. As far as intellegence goes I am probably a littel above average so you may have a point there, but I don't think a persons type has anything to do with intellegence. At least it is not a direst correlation coefficient. I am curious to know if you are perceptiove enough to know when I am joking and when I am being serious. My humor is very dark and complex and honestly I just dont think you get it. I would say 90% of the time I am the only person who will find the humor in something but when every one thinks something is funny I often don't.

You say I have Te. Could you explain how you came this conclussion so I can give an assesment of whether of not I think you are on to something? It seems like you just want to argue though so I doubt this is even a fuitful conversation other than the farting of course. In all honesty I think you just don't know me well enough to give any sort of analysis that I can take to heart.

In hindsight this thread was probably a bad idea.

 

[Architect]

I believe you to be an ISTP from what I can tell.

ISTP's are close cousins to INTP's, I'm quite familiar with them as my brother is one as are many of my colleagues. Since you have Ni in your tertiary you actually have fairly well developed N, combined with a dominate Ti that can lead you to believe you are an INTP.

One small thing that supports this is the discussion we have on Ask Architect about freedom and fairness. Our exchange is very typically INTP-ISTP, one I have with my brother all the time. He gets short with me, just like that, as I explain out my theories. Your "aura" or mien also says ISTP to me.

Edit: Thinking on it the previous point is very telling. I have this same interaction with ISTP's at work. ISTP's are action oriented people, where INTP's are more analysis oriented. An INTP will happily discuss the details and branches of a theory, but the ISTP invariable cuts it short with "what's the answer?"

For example, my ISTP brother was making a big investing decision and was asking for my advice. I started to explain the ramifications of various approaches he could use. It's quite subtle, and the amount of money involved was considerable. He wanted the short answer of "what do I do?" and didn't want to understand my theories. Of course you couldn't be a good investor without understanding all these subtleties and theories (Barry Ritholtz is a well known investor who understands this), but the action oriented ISTP wanted to cut to the chase.

 

[The Introvert]

I believe you to be an ISTP from what I can tell.

ISTP's are close cousins to INTP's, I'm quite familiar with them as my brother is one as are many of my colleagues. Since you have Ni in your tertiary you actually have fairly well developed N, combined with a dominate Ti that can lead you to believe you are an INTP.

One small thing that supports this is the discussion we have on Ask Architect about freedom and fairness. Our exchange is very typically INTP-ISTP, one I have with my brother all the time. He gets short with me, just like that, as I explain out my theories. Your "aura" or mien also says ISTP to me.

Edit: Thinking on it the previous point is very telling. I have this same interaction with ISTP's at work. ISTP's are action oriented people, where INTP's are more analysis oriented. An INTP will happily discuss the details and branches of a theory, but the ISTP invariable cuts it short with "what's the answer?"

For example, my ISTP brother was making a big investing decision and was asking for my advice. I started to explain the ramifications of various approaches he could use. It's quite subtle, and the amount of money involved was considerable. He wanted the short answer of "what do I do?" and didn't want to understand my theories. Of course you couldn't be a good investor without understanding all these subtleties and theories (Barry Ritholtz is a well known investor who understands this), but the action oriented ISTP wanted to cut to the chase.

With what I've seen of you, Architect's analysis ^^ and the general consensus of the forum, I'm also on board with ISTP.

If anything, this is simply for the fact that, like Architect said, you rarely seem to get into the nitty gritty details, and prefer to store the general picture in your database. I don't have any specific references here but I think you would agree.

 

[QuickTwist]

I believe you to be an ISTP from what I can tell.

ISTP's are close cousins to INTP's, I'm quite familiar with them as my brother is one as are many of my colleagues. Since you have Ni in your tertiary you actually have fairly well developed N, combined with a dominate Ti that can lead you to believe you are an INTP.

One small thing that supports this is the discussion we have on Ask Architect about freedom and fairness. Our exchange is very typically INTP-ISTP, one I have with my brother all the time. He gets short with me, just like that, as I explain out my theories. Your "aura" or mien also says ISTP to me.

Edit: Thinking on it the previous point is very telling. I have this same interaction with ISTP's at work. ISTP's are action oriented people, where INTP's are more analysis oriented. An INTP will happily discuss the details and branches of a theory, but the ISTP invariable cuts it short with "what's the answer?"

For example, my ISTP brother was making a big investing decision and was asking for my advice. I started to explain the ramifications of various approaches he could use. It's quite subtle, and the amount of money involved was considerable. He wanted the short answer of "what do I do?" and didn't want to understand my theories. Of course you couldn't be a good investor without understanding all these subtleties and theories (Barry Ritholtz is a well known investor who understands this), but the action oriented ISTP wanted to cut to the chase.

*Shudders* That last part doesn't sound like me.

It is always hard to argue with someone who is smarter than yourself so I am not even going to try. I can be stuborn but not to the point to where I would abandon logic.

I find this analysis to be quite facinating. Some one else mentioned that they thought I had Ni and as well as a dominated Ti which I suppose sat well with me but I didn't respond to the comment because I thought it lacked a certain depth as to the general priciple behind the conclusion.

What you are saying makes sense on a genetic level, meaning that I get my Se from my father's side and a well developed N from my mothers side, however, one thing that doesn't make sense to me is the fact that I am both a T and P Which are both opposites to what would be my genetic code, although I have seen Architect describ Ti as a J function. That still leaves the P which I myself cannot understand how this fits in to the equation. Also I am an introvert, I am 100% confident of this but I don't understand how this fits in either. If you could explain a little more about this it might clear things up for me.

I always thought if someone was an S that meant they were detail oriented and that is mot me at all. I generally like to think of things that are true on many different levels. I don't really know what this would mean for typing myself but it is what it is. Perhaps my Se and Ni are so close in relation to each other that when I use Se it often combines with my Ni leaving me unaware why I did what I did which is a problem I have all the time.

Yes, to me, I must understand the why to be satisfied. I will often think on and off, changing form subject to subject, when I am doing mundane activities like cleaning the bakery at work, and often times think about the reason behind a given action of an individual or idea that spontaniously occurs in my very slow thought proccess, and what I must do to change the circumstance. Conceptualizing the big picture of an idea is central to my thought proccess and how I go about reasoning through something.

Although I ofthen think about what I should do, I am in no way an adrenaline junkie which is typical of the ISTPs. Part of my thinking has to do with how I could/should improve things and the other part has to do with being productive.

 

[Brontosaurie]

i've been thinking of auxiliary as a weapon and tertiary as a tool. don't ask why - it's a silly experiment.

anyhow there seems to be something malignant about the auxiliary. my Ne often carries the main polemic force in a conflict, through suggestion of multiple, perplexing consequences and detection of crude inconsistencies which may then be ridiculed, their corollaries deprived of relevance. an INTJ or ISTJ may instead concentrate on pragmatic, readily convincing arguments grounded in terse, well-composed empirical evidence, whereas an INFJ or ISFJ is more prone to insist on compliance with socio-cultural equilibrium, appealing to shame in order to silence the opponent. ESFJ and perhaps ESTJ (a type i have little experience with) rely on disproportionate anecdotes. ENFJ constantly implies and exudes intuitive precedence and mastery in order to win.

as for tertiary tools, one of the first things i can recall about myself is an excellent long term memory. i loved gathering information and structuring it, relating things etc. strong Si. analogous examples can be found for other types, for example INFJ and ISFJ may be the most sound and respectful Ti users while the ISTP's i know are very able with Ni, effortlessly utilizing it to their benefit.

this may be baseless conjecture for all i know. and the distinction between tools and weapons is not clear. what i'd like to ask is: do you feel you confidently employ some function as a reliable resource, and some other as a natural weapon?

 

[Architect]

*Shudders* That last part doesn't sound like me.

Then why in the AA thread did you ask for a one line summary of the analysis I gave? The investing example I gave was just illustrative, but in AA I took an analysis approach of developing an idea, showing what it is and isn't, and drove to ultimately what I determined is probably the only valid answer. This is typical for INTP's, you see on these boards where we endlessly debate on the finer points of this or that.

When you responded I was reminded of all the conversations I've had with ISTP's, who get tired of my endless prevarications. We're both Ti dominates so are going for the same goals, but we get there differently. With Se/Ni in second/third place ISTP's are ready for action - the "high level" view as you say or I'd prefer top-down. INTP's with Ne/Si are more prone to build from the bottom up.

Don't know, maybe I'm overanalyzing, but then INTP's are prone to that and ISTP's aren't in my experience.

 

[QuickTwist]

i've been thinking of auxiliary as a weapon and tertiary as a tool. don't ask why - it's a silly experiment.

anyhow there seems to be something malignant about the auxiliary. my Ne often carries the main polemic force in a conflict, through suggestion of multiple, perplexing consequences and detection of crude inconsistencies which may then be ridiculed, and their corollaries deprived of relevance. an INTJ or ISTJ may instead concentrate on pragmatic, readily convincing arguments grounded in terse, well-composed empirical evidence, whereas an INFJ or ISFJ is more prone to insist on compliance with socio-cultural equilibrium, appealing to shame in order to silence the opponent. ESFJ and perhaps ESTJ (a type i have little experience with) rely on disproportionate anecdotes. ENFJ constantly implies and exudes intuitive precedence and mastery in order to win.

as for tertiary tools, one of the first things i can recall about myself is an excellent long term memory. i loved gathering information and structuring it, relating things etc. strong Si. analogous examples can be found for other types, for example INFJ and ISFJ may be the most sound and respectful Ti users while the ISTP's i know are very able with Ni, effortlessly utilizing it to their benefit.

this may be baseless conjecture for all i know. and the distinction between tools and weapons is not clear. what i'd like to ask is: do you feel you confidently employ some function as a reliable resource, and some other as a natural weapon?

Wut? I don't understand what the purpose was for your involvement in my thread was and how the question pertains to my type. Originally I made this thread to see if I needed to get a video test done, where I could do it, and how much would it cost. You didn't answer any of those questions.

Then why in the AA thread did you ask for a one line summary of the analysis I gave? The investing example I gave was just illustrative, but in AA I took an analysis approach of developing an idea, showing what it is and isn't, and drove to ultimately what I determined is probably the only valid answer. This is typical for INTP's, you see on these boards where we endlessly debate on the finer points of this or that.

When you responded I was reminded of all the conversations I've had with ISTP's, who get tired of my endless prevarications. We're both Ti dominates so are going for the same goals, but we get there differently. With Se/Ni in second/third place ISTP's are ready for action - the "high level" view as you say or I'd prefer top-down. INTP's with Ne/Si are more prone to build from the bottom up.

Don't know, maybe I'm overanalyzing, but then INTP's are prone to that and ISTP's aren't in my experience.

You assumed I was looking for a one line answer and assumed I wanted a summery. I just wanted the information to be presented in a different way without examples because examples can be skewed to mean anything you want them to mean, like facts. I wanted you to convay the ideas you were saying not the specifics.

[Edit] It was probably too much to ask you to rephrase everything you said into a different format which is why I didn't push it whe you gave the one line answer.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Wut? I don't understand what the purpose was for your involvement in my thread was and how the question pertains to my type. Originally I made this thread to see if I needed to get a video test done, where I could do it, and how much would it cost. You didn't answer any of those questions.

i offered you another way of determining type. i could have posted it somewhere else but hopefully it gave you food for thought.

 

[QuickTwist]

i offered you another way of determining type. i could have posted it somewhere else but hopefully it gave you food for thought.

I suppose it could've been food for thought if I didn't percieve everything you said to be about yourself.

 

[Ink]

Is there a reason you don't want to be typed as an ISTP?

 

[QuickTwist]

You must not have read my first post in responce to Architect. If you didn't see that I was open to the possibility to being ISTP then you didn't understand what I was saying.

Take a look at my profile, you will see I have, before you made that comment, labeled myself as IXTP.

 

[Ink]

Take this from an INTP living with 3 ISTPs and argues with them constantly, you are an ISTP. There's no doubt.

 

[Architect]

Take this from an INTP living with 3 ISTPs and argues with them constantly, you are an ISTP. There's no doubt.

Ha, zing! That's true, ISTP's are hugely argumentative, especially with INTP's.

Told ya.

 

[Brontosaurie]

I suppose it could've been food for thought if I didn't percieve everything you said to be about yourself.

granted i saw your thread as an opportunity to present my "theory". it's unfair to say it's all about myself though.

i thought you liked umbrella stuff that apply to many things, so i didn't feel the need to pin-point. attending to auxiliary and tertiary functions could aid you in finding out your type.

 

[Brontosaurie]

I suppose it could've been food for thought if I didn't percieve everything you said to be about yourself.

granted i saw your thread as an opportunity to present my "theory".

i thought you liked umbrella stuff that applies to many things, so i didn't feel the need to pin-point. attending to auxiliary and tertiary functions could aid you in finding out your type.

 

[QuickTwist]

Take this from an INTP living with 3 ISTPs and argues with them constantly, you are an ISTP. There's no doubt.

Ha, zing! That's true, ISTP's are hugely argumentative, especially with INTP's.

Told ya.

I suppose this assumes Architect believes Ink to be a true INTP. Could you validate this Archetect? Another question I have for you is do you believe most people active on this forum are INTPs?

granted i saw your thread as an opportunity to present my "theory". it's unfair to say it's all about myself though.

i thought you liked umbrella stuff that apply to many things, so i didn't feel the need to pin-point. attending to auxiliary and tertiary functions could aid you in finding out your type.

Maybe I just didn't like that you were talking about a theory about yourself.

I will continue to lable myself a IXTP for the time being.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Maybe I just didn't like that you were talking about a theory about yourself.

I will continue to lable myself a IXTP for the time being.

it's not a theory about myself, but naturally self-observation, along with observation of others, is a part of it.

 

[Ink]

Why don't you think I'm an INTP quicktwist?

 

[QuickTwist]

it's not a theory about myself, but naturally self-observation, along with observation of others, is a part of it.

You said yourself it was a theory.

Why don't you think I'm an INTP quicktwist?

I never said I didn't think you were an INTP, I was aking why Architect thought you were. I suck at typing people. People skills are not my fortay.

 

[Brontosaurie]

You said yourself it was a theory.

why does it have to be about me just because it's a theory?

 

[QuickTwist]

Because you are comparing yourself to other types. Kind of self explanatory Mr. top 1%.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Because you are comparing yourself to other types. Kind of self explanatory Mr. top 1%.

actually that would be, on average, mr average.

and a theory that can and does explain me is different from a theory intended specifically to explain me. in this case i examplified my belief using myself among others. of course you're free to speculate regarding my intention but it's quite rude to make that a first response.

 

[QuickTwist]

We are no longer talking about the OP, lets move on.

 

[Brontosaurie]

not sure what i did to offend you so much that you adamantly cling to an accusation proven false.

 

[QuickTwist]

I'm not offended so no apology is neccessary.

If no one else has any more insights I think we can call it a thread (I don't mean locking it though).

 

[Paladin-X]

Not sure if this helps at all or not, but this is a post I made on another forum about some of the realizations I had about being a Sensor and not Intuitive:

So the realization I had was in exploring what Sensing vs Intuition meant. I summed it up as using the five senses vs seeing what is not there. When they talk about using the five senses, people tend to focus on kinesthetics; however, what they actually mean is what you can literally see (smell, hear, taste, feel).

So, in my opinion, my girlfriend is without a doubt an xNFJ. I showed her this picture http://www.flickr.com/photos/marvino...re-2013-02-19/ and asked her to write everything that she sees in it.

I see what is literally there. Green grass, cloudy sky. She described it as vast, empty, and some other words that I don't remember now. I finally understood what they meant by seeing what is not there. They are abstract descriptions about concrete reality. It's not that I can't interpret reality the way she does, but I don't do it naturally. 'I can do it', is not quite the same as 'this is how I do it'. I think of 'seeing what is not there' as noticing what's missing. What I did not realize before, is that I notice details that are missing. Sensing is described as detail-oriented, which I confused with the personality trait. Kind of in the sense of being meticulous, which I am not. I am fairly oblivious to things. However, they mean detail-oriented in a more literal way. I tend to focus on the facts and details of things. More specifically, I tend to notice inconsistent details. All other details are fairly oblivious to me. Noticing inconsistencies is not a function of Intuition, but of Thinking, and more specifically Introvert Thinking. This is not to say that the other types can't do this, it's just what Ti does naturally, at least as I understand it.

I questioned her further on her point of view on things. She told me that she creates stories about everything she sees. She sees everything in an abstract way. She was going to write out her response to the picture in story form too, but opted for bullet points instead. She attributed this to her shorthand training as a nurse. I, on the other hand, most definitely see things in a very literal concrete way.

I'd also like to add that Ti and all the Introverted functions for that matter, in my opinion, have an intuitive quality to them.

Also, ISTP does not equate to adrenaline junkie. It is an observed tendency perhaps, but that is all. I am not an adrenaline junkie. (Well I do like driving fast, but not for adrenaline rush). I don't do many physical activities at all really. Especially not extreme ones.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[QuickTwist]

Not sure if this helps at all or not, but this is a post I made on another forum about some of the realizations I had about being a Sensor and not Intuitive:



I'd also like to add that Ti and all the Introverted functions for that matter, in my opinion, have an intuitive quality to them.

Also, ISTP does not equate to adrenaline junkie. It is an observed tendency perhaps, but that is all. I am not an adrenaline junkie. (Well I do like driving fast, but not for adrenaline rush). I don't do many physical activities at all really. Especially not extreme ones.

Just my 2 cents.

That was helpful but I still don't know.


Heres my video responce. Type this guy, He is almost exactly like me except I have gotten away from sports and he is getting into them.


http://youtu.be/BwHFjtBoxEI

 

[Obsidian]

Can't type him, because he deleted all the videos that show his face. He claims INTJ, but who knows.

Just post one of yourself.

 

[QuickTwist]

Wrong link, here you go:

http://youtu.be/D-xM62APctk

 

[Obsidian]

Given that he seems to be drunk in all of his videos, it is a little hard to say. I would guess probably INTP or ENTP.

 

[Ink]

The Guy in the video barely uses any extraverted function, definitely seems to mainly be in à ti-ni loop to me... The auxilliary function usually develops later than the tertiary function

 

[Hadoblado]

I don't think you are INTP.

Your style reminds me of a friends who I've always assumed was ISTP, but I could easily be wrong in this respect.

1) You have low self monitoring. You post ad libitum, creating threads willynilly.

2) You don't seem intrinsically motivated to learn, but prefer to have other people present their arguments which you can then process.

3) You are argumentative, but also blunt and dismissive.

The way in which you present yourself suggests to me that you're not interested in collaboration or a mutual exchange of information, but a transfer of information from them to you. You are result oriented (in the context of discussion on forums). You don't volunteer information unless you are looking for someone to turn it into a conclusion for you, which you then judge based on what you consider to be logical or accurate. From what I understand of the INTP atmosphere here, an INTP would give as much detail as possible in a prepackaged synopsis that predicts and addresses the needs of other analysts, whereas you seem to continuously add information as the discussion progresses.

I'm no good at typing, so I tend to phrase things in terms of other psychological constructs. I mean no offence by anything I say, though from what I understand, none should be taken. I am just some guy on the internet who doesn't actually know you. My conclusion that you are not INTP is based entirely on my own understanding of what INTPish behaviour is, not any textbook understanding of typology.

 

[Obsidian]

The auxilliary function usually develops later than the tertiary function

Is that written somewhere? I have never heard that.