Does this irritate you too?

[Reality is Optional]

Does it bug you when someone so obviously miss-types themselves, or is it just me?

For example, yesterday I was talking to this girl who took the test when she was in high school, and got ISFJ. I thought it fit her pretty well, but now, apparently, she's under the impression that she's an INFP, which really doesn't fit AT ALL. She is also fully convinced that she fits her "new" personality to a T, and then proceeded to give some examples and reasons why. I made an innocent comment like,

"Oh, I wouldn't have guessed you were an INFP, considering the things I've read about them."

After that, she went off on me about how some websites only spew BS and don't know what they're talking about. The funny thing is, is that everything she said that was "so clearly wrong" about INFPs were true in every INFP I've ever met. On top of that, everything she said that was wrong about her in the ISFJ personality profile (basically, she listed the flaws) were the things that were, if you ask me, most prominent in her outward personality.

I think she's confusing the kind of person she thinks/wants to be, and not seeing what she actually is. Of course, I just nodded, not wanting to waste my energy on explaining why she was NOT an INFP.

Does anyone else have experiences like this, or get irritated by it? Please share.

 

[Lot]

This happened to me several times in my life.

One friend kept insisting she was an introvert, despite all the evidence she wasn't. Also, because in the cult many of the women were NF's she thought that the ideal woman was an NF. She was convinced of her INFPness. There is a good chance she was really depressed, like most people in that circle. So her depressed behavior probably made her have some INFP qualities.

I had another friend, ISTJ, fit it to almost stereotypical levels. Because all the people around him were really into philosophy and teachers, he was convinced that he must be an INTJ. His wife is an ESFJ, and thinks she is an ESTJ for the same reasons.

There were actually a lot of S's that thought they were N's, and F's that thought they were T's, in that cult. When a bunch of people follow a "reason" worshiping INTJ, they'll all probably try to be just like him. Most of the people had a shallow understanding of MBTI. I was constantly correcting people's theory at the time. (and I'm still sub par in my knowledge) People idealizing themselves or having a shallow understanding are the big reasons for mistypings.

I just stopped caring about it. If someone wants to think they are another type and it helps them become a better them, who am I to tell them otherwise? The MBTI is a tool to help understand yourself and other people. It's not a helpful tool to everyone and it's not complete fact. It might be a wonderful system, but it has it's flaws. So why get all uppity about it? People will either correct them selves later, or they won't. But if they are getting defensive and annoyed, they aren't going to listen to you. So no reason to waste the effort.

 

[Analyzer]

Yeah I have noticed a lot of people who think they are INTJ's. Mostly SP's and some SJ's.

There seems to be some kind of introvert trend nowadays, could be related to Susan Cain's book Quiet the Power of Introverts. What's ironic is I think Susan might actually be a ENFP instead of INFP that she self types herself as.

 

[StevenM]

Youtuber EJArendee seems to think that there is a lot of INFP's on personality websites claiming to be INFJ's.

While looking at some INFJ's topics, like "Post the most cuddly picture of your animal!", or "What is the most beautiful bible passage that touched your heart?!" (<-slightly exageratted examples), I'm somewhat wondering if he's right. Also considering that INFJ is supposedly the most rarest types, and comparing that to the amount of people in the online INFJ population, something could seem....'off'.

Also, I must admit, that as I learn more about CF's, the more I realize that I may have mistyped others. It seems I would need a good sample of each type, and have a good deep interaction with all of them, to gain more solid conclusions and similarities of their traits and behaviors.

Who is to say that my conclusion of me being an INTP is valid? Even though personally, I seemed to have 'verified' this with various evidence, ideas and strategies. But how do we know for sure?

Yeah, I have gotten upset when I think I clearly see a mistype. But I would rather hold my tongue, as when I am in their shoes, I may somewhat get defensive about it as well.

However, if there is something blatantly wrong with my behaviour, that indicates that I'm clearly not INTP, please do point it out. I'm not initially as critical of other people's opinions as I guess I should be.

 

[Pyropyro]

No. I don't care much about which type they associate with.

I prefer telling them what my counselor did a while ago:
"Don't box yourself with your personality type."

The point is, one can use types as a reference point for fixing their lives but it isn't designed to be an absolute truth that one should live by.

 

[Hadoblado]

I think it's good for people to try out different types to see which one fits. Some people's 'trying' looks more like 'assuming' from the outside.

 

[Reality is Optional]

Youtuber EJArendee seems to think that there is a lot of INFP's on personality websites claiming to be INFJ's.

While looking at some INFJ's topics, like "Post the most cuddly picture of your animal!", or "What is the most beautiful bible passage that touched your heart?!" (<-slightly exageratted examples), I'm somewhat wondering if he's right. Also considering that INFJ is supposedly the most rarest types, and comparing that to the amount of people in the online INFJ population, something could seem....'off'.

Also, I must admit, that as I learn more about CF's, the more I realize that I may mistype others. It seems I would need a good sample of each type, and have a good deep interaction with all of them, to gain more solid conclusions and similarities of their traits and behaviors.

Who is to say that my conclusion of me being an INTP is valid? Even though personally, I seemed to have 'verified' this with various evidence, ideas and strategies. But how do we know for sure?

Yeah, I have gotten upset when I think I clearly see a mistype. But I would rather hold my tongue, as when I am in their shoes, I may somewhat get defensive about it as well.

However, if there is something blatantly wrong with my behaviour, that indicates that I'm clearly not INTP, please do point it out. I'm not initially as critical of other people's opinions as I guess I should be.

The fact that you're willing to doubt whether you're an INTP or not makes it more likely that you are one.

 

[Reluctantly]

It used to, back in the day, because I was genuinely interested in the cognitive functions, but couldn't find good discussion. People are quick to come to their own conclusions, reduce something inherently complex into something overly simple, and then try to tell people what is what, even though these are highly abstract ideas we're playing with. And don't get me wrong, in my frustration I sometimes would do the same in order to challenge people and force a better explanation out (though we'd just argue and disagree about everything). But after I looked into a lot of the philosophy behind it all and into the deep Jungian stuff, I've come to realize the steep learning curve behind the types, and even though I still talk about these things, I don't expect to change anyone's mind much.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

No it doesn't irritate me. People have their biases and it takes a tremendous amount of energy to inform them.

Getting along with someone mistyped is probably a little bit more troublesome, because that person knows MBTI and might start talking about it, which calls for a change of topic.

 

[ddspada]

Yes, it is sometimes annoying.

I've learned to use people's mistypings of themselves as ground on which I can analyze how people might view themselves, however. SFJs seem to tend to like to see (yay verbs!) themselves as NFPs in my experience, for example; and that has helped me better understand how they think of themselves.

Much like TMills, I am still doubtful as to my type (Almost 100% sure of INTP, but ENTP and ISTP are not out of the question), so I take care to calm down any anoyance that may manifest in me as a result of this because I am not excempt from the same.

Some people are open to debate and discussion over their own type, but some insist on being the type they want to be. If it's cool with them and as a result they see motivation to improve as people, then it's cool with me.

 

[StevenM]

Here is an interesting question.

Through what process and strategy do you use to properly identify someone's type?

Here is a process I go through:

Spoiler

Similar to trying to find the missing variables in a geometry problem, there may be more than one way to find an answer, and other possibilities to verify. I think it's good to have a 'toolbox' of different strategies and try each out.

Take the test - even if it isn't 100% accurate, it can still narrow the guessing game down a bit. Sometimes you don't have this option, as people don't want to be bothered.

Work out each MBTI letter - I used to do this at the start. Try to make a good guess between being drained by new social situations, or being energized by it. Seeing things concretely, or more abstract. Judging practically, or based on ethics/emotion. And the J/P would put the introvert/Extrovert direction of the functions together, and gives an idea if they are dominant judgers or perceivers. Or I try to see which Keirsey Group they are likely to be in. The NT's NF's, SP's or SJ's. Still, there may be some missing information, and mistakes made in this process.

Also, I would try to see if I can determine what CF's they value using over their unvalued ones. Are they Se/Ni or are they Si/Ne? Fe/Ti or are they Te/Fi? Using one set is boring and stressful, and the other is more their kind of element. This would at least give me an idea and narrow things down from 16 possibilities to only 4. I may need to better research each function, and how it presents itself more.

An interesting resource typing based on facial expressions and body language, a type of 'visual reading'. I think it was animekitty who brought this site to my attention - http://cognitivetype.com/visualreading/ . Some interesting things in there that show how the dominant functions are expressed in different types. For instance, the perceiving function may be able to be distinguished through the eyes, and the judging function through the rest of the face and hands. Not sure how accurate these results are, and I also may need much more practice in developing a good eye for it. Can't be used to type people online.

Socionics - I sometimes find that this branch of Jung's CF's can get pretty deep into detail, and also provides an intriguing resource tool when trying to type someone. I briefly read through how there is even different sub-types, which would explain why some INTP's may be different than others.

Looking through stereotype profiles on personalityjunkie and others, to get a better understanding of the types, and their typical characteristics. Looking through Jung's writings also can provide revelations. For instance, this resource http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm can make some 'aha' moments when trying to get insight on the most dominant and leading function.

I try to check and reference all of these tools, and see if I can get everything to "match" between all this information. The more things correlate together, the stronger and more confident my conclusions.

Of course, once a type is suspected, their behaviour is still monitored, and I'm always ready to adjust my conclusion if need be.

 

[ddspada]

Here is an interesting question.

Through what process and strategy do you use to properly identify someone's type?

I look at five things.

1) Whether or not there is an immediately visible behaviour pattern which is a "textbook" manifestation of a CF. Most often this is an extraverted function, but Ti and Si, too, shine through often. An aunt of mine, for instance, becomes gravely disturbed when the rules she imposes are not followed. They are often based solely on tradition, sometimes in efficiency and seldom on compassion/feelings/morals. This is visible in just a couple of minutes. I see this as evidence for Te and Si, but it's far from conclusive.
Furthermore, sometimes the way in which a person speaks gives hints as to what the inferior is even when there is no clear evidence for its corresponding dominant.

2) When no obvious CF can be seen, I resort to the Myers-Briggs dychotomies. As much as they are inferior to CF typing, often they can get you in the ballpark. My stepfather became interested in MBTI during a brief period. He's very quiet, one of the quietest people I know; constantly rejects theory as being useless without action; and extraordinarily easily comes to believe that people can quickly become close and lifelong friends with him. Determining ISFX was easy. After reading most type descriptions on his own, he thought nothing except ISFP fit him. He fits the introvert, sensor and feeler descriptions well and that was a starting point.

3) Whether or not any (stereo)type fits the person. If there's a jock who practices all sports known to man and is a jerk to most people, I proceed with the above, but consider his behaviour to be (weak, but existent) evidence for ESTP in particular. Same with people devouring fantasy novels being INFJ, party animals being ESFP, people who love cars being ISTP. This is imo the weakest way to type someone (and not very enlightening as far as understanding any of the theory behind type), but sometimes no other initial lead is any better.

4) What type people think they are initially and how they justify it. ISJs and ESPs mistyping themselves as NPs or NJs, respectively, for example, often cannot justify well why they are intuitives other than them "feeling" intuitive. No appreciarion for abstraction or ideas, no cross-connection of contexts, no attempt at explaining why something is the way it is on grounds of theory supporting facts. This makes sense within the framework of type; sometimes the dominant is so natural that periods of interaction with the inferior are remembered as very vivid. IIRC, Architect has said he initially mistyped himself as INFJ for this reason.

5) Ocassionally MBTI type is a mystery, but Enneagram type will be obvious. If someone seems INTPish but is clearly an E2, he/she is more likely an ISFJ (same CFs in a different hierarchy). It's uncommon to find an ENTJ who isn't E8, E5 or E6. Almost any E4 is very likely to be an FP. Cross-referencing both models can help a little.

Moreover, Sensors mistyping as Intuitives is more common than the reverse in my experience. Thinkers tend to be prouder about being thinkers than feelers about being feelers (especially men). Intuitives are much more likely to have a lasting interest in topics such as MBTI.

All in all, pretty much the only way to accurately type is CF analysis, but when nature and nurture do not flow along the same vein, this can take several months of interaction with a person.

Edit: Holy pantaloons! That page you mention looks very interesting, TMills. I see myself spending several hundred hours looking onto that.

 

[Analyzer]

That site has some interesting material.

http://cognitivetype.boards.net/thread/135/ssh-albert-einstein
http://cognitivetype.boards.net/thread/169/physics-fine

I was always under the impression that the natural sciences such as physics were in the realm of Te-Fi(empiricism in general) and how Einstein never really fit the INTP type. I think INTP's like to say he belongs in same type because he is widely known as a "genius" and his Ne was very apparent.