ISTJ = meanest?, ENFP = nicest?

[Words]

E = outward focus
N = extends thought beyond how a person looks and acknowledges others' possible personality complications.
F = i vote for F.
P = Adaptive to different behaviors. Acknowledges differences.

ISTJ...just opposite.

 

[Adymus]

Can I just save you from making more of these threads and tell right now that next time you have a question about which type is the _____ist, this statement applies; it's all relative, and on top of that, what makes them nice or mean or clean has more to do with their experiences and what kind of a person they grew into. Having certain cognitive functions are not going to make you mean or nice right off the bat.

 

[Words]

You're right but...I'm not exactly pointing at people and talking realistically. Just the theory and its relation to tendencies.

 

[Adymus]

Dude, either way the answer is going to be the same ISTJ =/= Mean and ENFP =/= Nice. Theory has nothing to do with this.

 

[Words]

Dude, either way the answer is going to be the same ISTJ =/= Mean and ENFP =/= Nice. Theory has nothing to do with this.

Explanation? By mean and nice, I meant tendency and level of being socially welcoming.

 

[BigApplePi]

Let's rephrase. Do either of these types have a greater potential for being mean or nice? What type was Adolf Eichmann? ISTP?
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/eichmann.html

 

[Cognisant]

I work with an ISTJ, they're all business.

They don't mean to be mean.

 

[Da Blob]

I do not know if this is relevant, but when I worked at the prison, I administered the MBTI test to my clients there. At least 75% of those criminals were ISTJs.

 

[reputo]

When I was a teenager before I matured completely, I would score as an ISTJ and I was a pretty antisocial (in the clinical sense of the word) person. Of course, I wasn't a true ISTJ because I had not fully developed my true personality. However, I can completely believe the idea that the majority of criminals are ISTJs.

 

[sagewolf]

What proportion of the prison population was that? Those who were ordered to see you, those who chose to see you, a mixture of the above, or everyone?

You're right but...I'm not exactly pointing at people and talking realistically. Just the theory and its relation to tendencies.

The theory is nothing but tendencies: Someone who comes up as, say, ENFJ on the test isn't contsantly extraverted, intuiting, feeling and making decisions. Basically, all that says is they tend towards extraversion, intuiting, feeling and making decisions first. It doesn't mean they can't ever show I, S, T, or P traits and it doesn't even mean they don't. I have my extraverted moments when I want to work at something or go interact with people (T/F). I have my S moments and my F moments (oh so many F moments...) too.

N = extends thought beyond how a person looks and acknowledges others' possible personality complications.

S-types aren't nearly that shallow. They just have a greater tendency to make decisions based on what information they gather, rather than information they infer or posit. Ns are fully capable of judging people based on their looks alone, or the sound of their voice, or they way they hold themselves.

 

[Fukyo]

Every time you attempt to correlate a small, insignificant trait from your everyday life or personal preferences to a personality type and then make a thread about it in a MBTI forum, a kitten dies. True story.

 

[NoID10ts]

That's a lot of dead kittens.

:hopliti06:

 

[Vegard Pompey]

Every time you attempt to correlate a small, insignificant trait from your everyday life or personal preferences to a personality type and then make a thread about it in a MBTI forum, a kitten dies. True story.

And that's why the INFP is meanest.

 

[flow]

INTPs are the worst, I thought everyone knew that. Nicest are certainly the ESTJs.

 

[sagewolf]

Every time you attempt to correlate a small, insignificant trait from your everyday life or personal preferences to a personality type and then make a thread about it in a MBTI forum, a kitten dies. True story.

Somebody think of the kittens!

 

[bovinity]

I love ENFP's, ENFP's love me.

 

[Sparrow]

INTPs are really nice, what are you guys talking about?

ESFJs are pretty mean when they lose control.

 

[Words]

S-types aren't nearly that shallow. They just have a greater tendency to make decisions based on what information they gather, rather than information they infer or posit. Ns are fully capable of judging people based on their looks alone, or the sound of their voice, or they way they hold themselves.

This.\/

The theory is nothing but tendencies: Someone who comes up as, say, ENFJ on the test isn't contsantly extraverted, intuiting, feeling and making decisions. Basically, all that says is they tend towards extraversion, intuiting, feeling and making decisions first. It doesn't mean they can't ever show I, S, T, or P traits and it doesn't even mean they don't. I have my extraverted moments when I want to work at something or go interact with people (T/F). I have my S moments and my F moments (oh so many F moments...) too.

Then, by tendency, wouldn't an N be more friendlier? How does S contribute to being a more unbiased and open friendly-like person? How does N not?


Side Note: My cousin is an ISTJ and he's definitely a morally greater person(gives charity etc.) than me. Its not so personal...just a thought I had. My ENFP cousin was a bit..."nicer" though---prone to make the effort to smile and has this "sincere" aura.

 

[bodhisattvafication]

INTP = Nicest other types spend all their time playing golf and dining at taco bell

 

[bovinity]

INTP = Nicest other types spend all their time playing golf and dining at taco bell

I'll to that good sir

 

[sagewolf]

Then, by tendency, wouldn't an N be more friendlier? How does S contribute to being a more unbiased and open friendly-like person? How does N not?

...Neither of them really contributes in any way to friendliness, I think (my understanding of this is far from perfect). S/N functions are Perceiving functions, so they tend to influence the information we take in, not the way we choose to act on it. ...As far as I know, S/Ne are more likely, actually, to jump to a conclusion than S/Ni (extraverted functions, generally, (I think) don't explain themselves; they just present a perception or judgment. They're more immediate). I can't explain this, nor do I fully understand it (which makes me wonder why I'm posting this in the first place), so I'll just quote someone who does to help me make the point:

INTPs tend to be rather mistrusting of people and are rather sceptical. However, a lot of their trust is based on what the Ne function tells them about somebody. This can lead to a naivity and sometimes to prejudices based on intuitive perceptions of appearance and style.

My italics. (Also, grammar nazi that I am, I corrected the spelling of 'appearances".) I feel like there's a giant gap in the argument I just presented, but I can't think how to fill it, so... ah well.

 

[ShrineofmadLaughter]

I suppose I can see why someone might think that ISTJ's are mean, but it's just not to case. My brother epitomizes the ISTJ stereotype and he's one of the nicest guys I now, just prone to be driven to stress easily I find.

 

[Ntufnel]

Consider the relativity of reality relating to personality. Your perception of ISTJ is actually a bias in the ISTP perspective towards ISTJs. I find ISTJs to be quite pleasant.

The unfortunate assumption of a lot of type theory is that your type is actually correct in its interpretations of things it should be good at. (no offense intended, just putting this out there for Ne consideration)

hmm...

 

[Words]

I only know one ISTJ; and he's definitely a more charitable person than I. I knew him since I was kid and faithfully trusts his loyalty. How am I biased?

---

Though I definitely like being helped with the initial thought (notice the question mark), please do so in MBTI form. N/S is discussed but half baked. The negative result of accepting a tendency theory is the latter creation of some biases but I can sacrifice that for some food for thought. All in exclusion of external, conditioned, or nurtured opinion known as "reality".


---

And I doubt I'm any Sensor. To(I) accept so would be to revert the definition of those perceiving functions. Its plain obvious and a pretty hard possibility. Though perhaps I should still leave it open. But that is irrelevant.

 

[Sugarpop]

Can I just save you from making more of these threads and tell right now that next time you have a question about which type is the _____ist, this statement applies; it's all relative, and on top of that, what makes them nice or mean or clean has more to do with their experiences and what kind of a person they grew into. Having certain cognitive functions are not going to make you mean or nice right off the bat.

Even more to the point; it depends on who you are. INTPs on this forum seem to disagree with the general sentiments of the ISTJ stereotype. An ESTJ might not.

MBTI is an RPG, and ISTJs are Fighters, so they can have any alignment.

 

[Adymus]

Even more to the point; it depends on who you are. INTPs on this forum seem to disagree with the general sentiments of the ISTJ stereotype. An ESTJ might not.

MBTI is an RPG, and ISTJs are Fighters, so they can have any alignment.

Well that's what I meant by "It's all relative"... but yeah.


All Personality types could have any alignment, though I'd say ISTJs are totally dwarves.

 

[Kellhus]

E = outward focus
N = extends thought beyond how a person looks and acknowledges others' possible personality complications.
F = i vote for F.
P = Adaptive to different behaviors. Acknowledges differences.

ISTJ...just opposite.

ISTJ's are simply more so structure based with a definite view on what is right and what is wrong. They are not "mean" so much as stable. ENFP's are more sensitive, and often times more open. Their adaptability can be just as "bad" with an ISTJ's rigidity. Their ability to adapt and change their behavior can be mistaken for simple dismissive action. Keep in mind that when under moderate stress, every type will revert to their shadow functions. Thusly, ISTJ's to ENFP's and vice versa. It would make little sense if you believed one to be "nicer" if only to find that one was the other under great stress.

 

[Geminii]

At least 75% of those criminals were ISTJs.

I wonder if a prison environment causes people to shift towards an ISTJ reading and/or mindset?

 

[Words]

Though I still believe, due to lack of counter evidence, that there's a link between personality and a person's tendency of "social/people welcoming". An example would be introverts clearly preferring less interaction as oppose to extroverts. Not exactly alignment. Though, I'm starting to figure the irrelevancy of all of this due to its lack of "reality effect". And since quality of cognitives depends on a person's condition of stress(bad Ne=hostility), effects of personality on ones social philosophy may really be nothing.
---
Nevertheless, what is a "dwarf"?

 

[pjoa09]

Every time you attempt to correlate a small, insignificant trait from your everyday life or personal preferences to a personality type and then make a thread about it in a MBTI forum, a kitten dies. True story.

hahahhahhahhaahhaahahahhaa

 

[faithapasta]

Hey guys =]
So, I'm an ENFP and I came on this forum for reference. Hehe =] See, I love INTPs. They're fantastic. And I could listen to them all day.

BUT IN RESPONSE TO THIS THREADDDDD,
my mom's an ISTJ. We are LITERALLY polar opposites, and we get along great. We have arguments all the time, but we never fight. We just differ on how we should go about things, etc.

But I wouldn't say they're mean... they just see the world differently. They're very.. within themselves and don't really pay attention to people or the world around them. They deal with what they need to deal with and not much else. BUT, they're people just the same. And despite their craziness, I love still 'em. Deep down, beneath the concentrated, distant exterior, they've still got a good heart. Everyone does.

There's really no best or worst of the types. They're just... different. =]

 

[JoeJoe]

Hey guys =]
Deep down, beneath the concentrated, distant exterior, they've still got a good heart. Everyone does.

Aawwwwwwwwwwwwwwww...

I <3 NFs.

 

[faithapasta]

^_^

<3

 

[PapyrusAirplanes]

Okay, I just want to say...

ENFPs and ENFJs have Fi, which often (especially if uncontrolled) makes them think of their own feelings first before others'. They dwell on themselves and their wants. (... Maybe not all ENFPs are like that, but all the ones I've met (including those to whom I am related) all fit this description.)

Yes, ENFPs are people-lovers, but it's usually because people make THEM feel good, not because they genuinely want to help others. And if anyone makes them feel BAD, especially about THEMSELVES... well, then watch out.

... And ISTJs are just sarcastic. *laugh*

... But I guess anyone can be a boob, no matter the Type. Except ESTJs. ESTJs are pretty boobish.

 

[faithapasta]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. In my experience of ENFPs and as an ENFP, all we want to do is help others, which does make us feel good. I'm a CNA, working on being an RN. I live to help people. Haha and I mean, when people make me feel bad... I legitimately feel bad. And just sort of... distance myself from others. I don't really know what you mean by watch out, but I'm pretty harmless when people make me feel bad. Just sayin'.

 

[Cavallier]

Yes, ENFPs are people-lovers, but it's usually because people make THEM feel good, not because they genuinely want to help others. And if anyone makes them feel BAD, especially about THEMSELVES... well, then watch out.

... And ISTJs are just sarcastic. *laugh*

I've got three close friends in this world. ENTJ, ENFP, and ISTJ. I'll leave the first out for obvious reasons.

I disagree completely with your assessment of ENFPs. My ENFP is absolutely motivated by guilt. When he was much younger he would get a little stubborn if he felt like he was being put upon too much. However, in the long run everybody else runs his life because of statements like, "I really missed you in dance today!" which make him feel guilty. I had hoped that someday he would learn to say no when he wanted but I realized that his proudest moments are when he fails to meets somebody's expectations and then later works hard and not only meets but beats their expectations. He LOVES people. I've never met anybody who loves people like an ENFPs. This makes them seem extremely sweet. However, in the long run if you want an ENFP to stick around on a regular basis you have to be prepared to make them feel guilty for not spending time with you. Otherwise they will be so busy building new relationships with the rest of the world that you get left by the wayside. It's not that they love you any less it's just that they have so many people to meet, love, and enjoy. That's how they work. We still consider each other to be close friends but we don't see each other more than once a year or so. This means he can be out making friends and being social and I don't have to be. It works well for both of us.

Long/Short: ENFPs are off the cuff are extremely friendly but their devotion can at times be lacking.

The ISTJ is sarcastic. Also, extremely loyal. They can often be wet blankets. My friend is very much all business as Cog puts it but at the same time utterly and hilariously sarcastic the entire time. A lot of people think she's a bitch and uncaring but they are completely dead wrong. She is this way with people she doesn't know. It is very tiring for her to put on a friendly persona with new people. Typical I yes? However, if you are her friend she is funny and cares deeply for you. She wants very much for her friends to be happy. This is an extremely motivating force in her life.

Long/Short: ISTJs are off the cuff unfriendly but they are loyal to the death.

Edit: Obviously this is all situational so it should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[nexion]

I think it would be pretty cool to have an ISTJ mindset. From a theoretical standpoint, at least.

 

[JUN]

No, they can both be mean and nice, obviously.

 

[Enne]

Okay, I just want to say...

ENFPs and ENFJs have Fi, which often (especially if uncontrolled) makes them think of their own feelings first before others'. They dwell on themselves and their wants. (... Maybe not all ENFPs are like that, but all the ones I've met (including those to whom I am related) all fit this description.)

Yes, ENFPs are people-lovers, but it's usually because people make THEM feel good, not because they genuinely want to help others. And if anyone makes them feel BAD, especially about THEMSELVES... well, then watch out.

... And ISTJs are just sarcastic. *laugh*

... But I guess anyone can be a boob, no matter the Type. Except ESTJs. ESTJs are pretty boobish.

ENFJs do not have (consciously / in their four primary functions) Fi.

 

[Words]

No, they can both be mean and nice, obviously.

I didn't mean it literally.

Basically, it is simplified to Fi(Aux)Te(Ter) vs. Te(Aux)Fi(Ter). With FiTe, the Fi is set to greater priority than Te, therefore there is more consideration to emotional connections. With TeFi, the opposite. Or for a simpler understanding, just look at how each types react in social situations. In addition, this is disregarding "development". (I know an old IxTP who was incredibly charismatic.)

...though the birth of this thread was eons ago.

 

[JUN]

So people who are more emotional are nicer ? Why ?

 

[Words]

So people who are more emotional are nicer ? Why ?

"Nice". What is "nice"? I was careful of heading into semantics but oh well...

I was working on the definition that "nice" means a greater consideration on other's current sensations: personal consideration. If Fi prioritizes empathy, then certainly one with Fi as priority would be "nicer".

Emotion, by itself and though related, is a different topic.

----

"Emotional People are 'Nicer'"

If healthy, perhaps there is a trend.

 

[JUN]

Hm, interesting, are you sure you're INTP ? your Ne seems to be all over the place, I mean, in the same, apparent, line of thought you said that nice was subjective on a thread you started by claiming a MBTI type is nicer and another is meaner. Well, that's ok, people change their ideas, but there's no such thing as functions related to good or evil. Functions are only engineering, nothing else.

People with Fi can be very mean to some people and very nice to other, simple as that. No one is "nice" no one is "mean". Everyone has their moments, everyone is sort of balanced. But the greater truth here is that functions don't imply any sort of Good or Evil spectrum.

 

[Words]

Hm, interesting, are you sure you're INTP ?

Does it matter to you?

It matters to me because the theory interests me. It's my subjective opinion.

If I consider the INTP functions: Ti Ne Si Fe, I am most certainly an INTP.

your Ne seems to be all over the place, I mean, in the same, apparent, line of thought you said that nice was subjective on a thread you started by claiming a MBTI type is nicer and another is meaner. Well, that's ok, people change their ideas, but there's no such thing as functions related to good or evil. Functions are only engineering, nothing else.

Nice IS subjective but I was referring to what is the overall common definition of "nice". In general, charitable = nice

People with Fi can be very mean to some people and very nice to other, simple as that. No one is "nice" no one is "mean". Everyone has their moments, everyone is sort of balanced. But the greater truth here is that functions don't imply any sort of Good or Evil spectrum.

I am not talking about alignment. I am talking about the general tendency of social reactions of certain types.

 

[JUN]

Does it matter to you?

It matters to me because the theory interests me. It's my subjective opinion.

If I consider the INTP functions: Ti Ne Si Fe, I am most certainly an INTP.

Nice IS subjective but I was referring to what is the overall common definition of "nice". In general, charitable = nice

I am not talking about alignment. I am talking about the general tendency of social reactions of certain types.

Sure you're an INTP.

So you were referring to what is the overall common definition of "nice" and in the same line of thought, or rather, in other threads and even here, you've been advertising that it is subjective ?

And you're not talking about alignment ? You used nice and mean. You said nice = charitable (generally), grammatically nice is a sorts of opposite of mean, therefore mean = non-charitable ? So... that makes it an alignment, I believe.

Am I wrong ?

 

[Words]

Sure you're an INTP.

No, of course not!

So you were referring to what is the overall common definition of "nice" and in the same line of thought, or rather, in other threads and even here, you've been advertising that it is subjective ?

Yes it is subjective but unless we have a definition for it, we cannot move on.

And you're not talking about alignment ? You used nice and mean. You said nice = charitable (generally), grammatically nice is a sorts of opposite of mean, therefore mean = non-charitable ? So... that makes it an alignment, I believe.

It does, doesn't it? But, as I've said, the "nice" and "mean" I meant weren't designated towards the literal meaning(the common meaning) of it. I guess this is a fault in the my delivery.

Am I wrong ?

Whether you are or not, thanks for the discussion.

 

[nexion]

No, of course not!

What the hell? You just went through 2 posts, one saying "I am an INTP," and this saying "I'm not an INTP."

What are you?!

 

[cheese]

^

I'm-an-untypeable-God-thing-muahahaha.

 

[JUN]

No, of course not!


Yes it is subjective but unless we have a definition for it, we cannot move on.



It does, doesn't it? But, as I've said, the "nice" and "mean" I meant weren't designated towards the literal meaning(the common meaning) of it. I guess this is a fault in the my delivery.




Whether you are or not, thanks for the discussion.

Refer to the "Hallo there" thread. Thanks for the discussion ? The pleasure is all mine.

 

[nexion]

^

I laughed quietly to myself.