Oh, that reminds me. Puffy, you said your logic wasn't as logically whole as ESCs and Words. I must say I disagree. I haven't noticed such difference. Though, I don't read much religion threads where I believe you post a lot. I don't read that many posts by Words either, he often talks about semantics and that's too detaily for me.
I'm not really all that curious. It sucks for a fraud to be exposed. I've already been hunted and captured involuntary once(intpc witch hunt). I hope my new tactics are working better.
Well. Yes, if it's serious. On INTPc we had this thread 'Technical types you'. Highly popular, it was a bit tedious(but funny). What you got was the letters. In my case that was ISFP. And when probed as to why, all you got was. That is your type. There is no doubt about it. A bit later though it was ISTP, and also once INFJ. One thing that was sure was that I was no INTP. The complete polar. But I think that was Hustler who said so. Then there is the ISTJ typings, and the INTJ, and the ENFP and ENFJ and ISFJ typings. And INXP(from Deckard, I liked that, said why), ENTP, XNTP prob some more. Oh, yes, and INFP.
I'm not sure how many perspectives I need. What I do think is great though, is that it gives you insight into how other people experience you. Now that is valuable. But I have not found the typings done on me to be all that insightful, they seem to have been done mostly in the moment, and they are inconsistent, so somewhat given up. Ceg here seems to know what s/he is talking about, so perhaps it would be different. Doesn't know me though, so I doubt I'd get a typing.
Oh, that reminds me. Puffy, you said your logic wasn't as logically whole as ESCs and Words. I must say I disagree. I haven't noticed such difference. Though, I don't read much religion threads where I believe you post a lot. I don't read that many posts by Words either, he often talks about semantics and that's too detaily for me.
Haa, well thank you. That's actually a nice compliment, as I am usually a little insecure about my 'wholeness' (tertiary Ti, I think.)
I used to post a lot in them; I am pretty secure about my decision to leave Christianity these days though, so I feel less need to write insecure treatises on alternatives I've been playing with the idea of writing a detailed thread on "identity" recently though. A lot of thoughts have been coming together.
What you identify as "detaily" is actually what I suspect Ti (INTP, ISTP) dominants would appear like in text. I suspect Words, Eyeseecold and Big Apple Pi are INTPs, who all have this quality to some extent. I wouldn't like to many any more guesses than that though :P
As for me, I think it is fair to say that my Ti is over-developed and my Fe a little disassociated. Though it's been improving since I accepted I am an INFJ rather than an INTP. I spend a lot of time "Ti'ing" out my thought models; at the same time because I spend that amount of time in a tertiary, which isn't natural, it means I am often insecure about my own conclusions. That's the way I see it, typology wise, anyway.
You're actually amongst a small portion of prominent members that I have not managed to get much of an idea of in terms of type.
I rarely make any attempt to type people so much as that I end up reading them over a long period of time, it's an ongoing process that never really stops so long as I'm observing them, and with you I think a lot of your posts are made in jest or satire and very rarely disclose personal feelings or motivations, all of which makes it a bit more of a challenge to get a grasp on.
I have a suspicion you may indeed be a TiNe (INTP), but that's not something I think should be taken as anything more than an inspired guess.
It would be interesting having a thread where everyone who liked could give their analysis of anyone. Who cares whether it was accurate as long as people gave reasons for their assumption. Would probably have some interesting perspectives on people. And our self-obsession would be satisfied.
I won't start such a thread because I have way too little knowledge on the topic. I don't have time to upgrade it until after Christmas I think.
I'm not really all that curious. It sucks for a fraud to be exposed. I've already been hunted and captured involuntary once(intpc witch hunt). I hope my new tactics are working better.
Basically, Lobstrich, imagine you picked up a magazine and on pg. 3 it had a "personality quiz". You answer 30 - 50 generalised questions and you are given a description. The description is vague enough that most people who get it can agree with a few of the points and think "bingo, that's me." MBTI is basically astrology, same deal. Personality is far too complex to be uncovered by what is basically an abstract, or perhaps a blurb description. Your dismissal of ENFP on the basis of the test description is irrational in this context. Though let me make this plain - I am not saying you are an ENFP, just picking up on a few things you have said.
Except MBTI is a little more specific and its around the double of those questions. I get your point though. But like many. I'm not on this forum because I'm way into typology. I'm alright with the "perversion of MBTI" I read that MBTI profile of an INTP and it fit perfectly. I'm an INTP. And that's fine with me. I have no need to find out if I'm an ENFP or ESFJ or whatever you might think I am. I think I'm INTP and that's like I've already said; fine with me.
Also. Just because I have no interest in typology, that makes me an "F"? Because have no need to further 'investigate' typology I'm irrationally neglecting the type I might "truly" be. (I know you did not say what type I am. But you did call me irrational on the basis of me not ignoring what type others might think I am) But I will say again; I think I'm an INTP because I read MBTI profile of it. And that's fine with me. The reason I'm refusing that I might be ENFP is mainly because for me to accept the typing of others (who are playing a different game) I have to play their game. I need to understand on what logic they are typing me. But since I do not know anything about the way they do it, I choose to not accept it. And secondly because the arguments that have been given to me were the way I look (which I frankly think is complete and utter bullshit.) and because I have opinions? And because I'm subjective when I debate. We are all subjective. We can choose a more 'objective' approach but we choose that approach because we subjectively think it's the best approach.
My point is that I do not think I'm any more subjective that you or any more "F'ey". I read the MBTI profile of the INTP, it fit me perfectly, and that's really what got me to this forum. And that's really only what interests me now. Not so much the letters. I know I'm repeating "I read the MBTI bla bla" I'm sorry about that but I really need all of you to understand that I'm not "irrationally" neglecting and refusing to hear what you have to say because I'm not "objective" enough to listen to it. I just can't be bothered, it's not interesting to me. Just like I can't be bothered to watch any sport but boxing. The rest are not interesting to me.
That does not make me "irrational" or F'ey or an ENFP (I know you didn't call me that) -- It makes me a human being. I have interests, preferances and opinions. Just like every single one of you.
The only thing I really wanted to write is regarding the whole "you're not me, only I can read me" stance. You also have your own body, would you care to tell a biologist that they can't interpret your body because that right is reserved exclusively for you? It really is the same thing with personality, I don't think we know much about ourselves - it is that exploration which even inspired Jung.
Psychology and physiology are to completely different things. If I have a cut on my knee it's not something anyone needs a degree to see.
I never said interpreting my mind is reserved exlusively for me. I said that you should not act as if your interpretations are better than mine.
I think you should not act this way because you simply do not know how and what I(or anyone else) is thinking. Sure you can interpret the way I(or anyone else) behaves but you should not say "You behave like this because of that" Because you truly don't know. Who says I'm not forcing this "irrationality"? I'm not saying I am, because I'm not. But you don't know if I am, even though I just said I'm not. Same goes for me. I think many of this forum are forcing their "objectivity" and "rationality" as if they do not have feelings or as if they have some magical ability to be 100% objective.... But I can't be sure. What I'm get so riled up about is when people act as if they are (and can) be sure. It's something that's always ticked me off. Look how much time I spent on Zago. I did so because his entire existence was based around his philosophy of there being a "objective good" or "objective better" and that's one of the only two things that frankly and truly piss me the fuck off
Oh god!! I get pissed off by something. I must be F and I must be an ENFP because I'm getting pissed off by something other people do!!
(Sorry, couldn't help it. But I just find it so ridiculous that I'm "irrational" because there's things in this world that piss me off.. We ALL have things that annoy us. Piss us off, even. I just choose to not forcibly hide it to seem rational and calm. Which is what I think many on this forum are doing because they are so clinged to the whole "NT" thing. But like I said.. I cannot be sure! )
If personality should become science, there will be personality experts who can tell you more about yourself than you can. In the end, by treating the test as reliable, you are already doing this, implying that the test-writers have the ability to describe you. Cegorach has done much more research into personality than you, why is s/he not able to also describe what s/he sees?
If typology because becomes science and I can take a test and it bleeps "ENFP! ENFP! ENFP!" I'll go "sure" if they have some description of the ENFP and if I do not relate to it. I ask for the INTP description, just to see the difference. If I then relate to the INTP description I'll consider myself and INTP. But I'll acknowledge that "science has proven me an ENFP" and I'll tell everyone who's into types "I tested ENFP but consider myself an INTP" if that makes a difference. And that's because I don't really hang myself in these letters. I just relate to what the INTP description says and not what the ENFP (or INFP) description says. And I have read them both, I got curious when it was suggested that I might be one of those.
Personally, I think you're too caught up on what "F" is as a stereotype that you are not able to see the F functions as they more likely are. I am an INFJ, but the F in isolation means nothing, it is a part of a complete configuration that only makes sense as a functioning whole. My writing is not as logically "whole" as say Words or Eyeseecold, but I am cool-headed and perfectly capable of clear and deep thought...
Personally I think you are to caught up in what T is. Almost as if T is this state of having no feelings or opinions (and magically having nothing that annoys you) where you (yet again, magically) have the ability to remain 100% objective.
I have never said that Fs are this hysterical stereotype that cry and scream. I know this. But Ts are not this 'unhysterical' stereotype that does not get angry.
Feel free to ignore anything that you no longer feel is an issue or that doesn't need further elaboration, if it's not an issue I'm not looking for validation of having been correct.
I don't understand what you're saying by this. I think I quite clearly was not going to reply not because I did not have an answer or because I didn't think anything needed further elaboration. But because I had not slept, was lazy and couldn't be bothered.
True, but I'd say it'd be better to mention that you aren't able to address her position and perhaps ask for an explanation of how her model works. You don't really have to be convinced by it and I don't think too many people take the typings thrown around here very seriously, so it's easy to ignore too.
Sure, it's easy to ignore. But I expect people to be ready with their arguments when the make claims. If you look back I did nothing but ask for explainations. Mainly because the claims were supported by ridiculous things like how I look. I do not intend to bash Phoenix (this is directed to you as well Phoenix. In case you're reading it) Because I know I keep mentioning how ridiculous I think it was and still is. But that's just how It is. I think Pod'Lair (or any argumentation that brings a little) is a joke.
I didn't mean I brought up the sports analogy, that was you, but I was the one who explained to you that you were the only one using MBTI, so it's difficult to imagine that this quote is accurate
It wasn't until my post just before the quoted one that that issue was cleared up, so how you were defending yourself from us all playing different "games" before you realized we even were is a little baffling.
No, I get it. It's true I didn't start with the "sports" but I think what I meant by saying what I did is that I was never arguing about me being INTP, INFP or ENFP I was arguing the arguments(that backed up me being ENFP) being brought to me. And that is in a since me arguing football/golf because I simply did not agree with the argumentation. I guess when you mentioned that we do it different ways I sort of thought "Yeah! That's exactly what I mean" Or maybe "Yeah! That's exactly what I've been trying to say" I think what you said was what I was already sort of wrestling around in (admittedly, failing at) trying to explain. I don't know if what I'm writing now makes any sense. I'm just sort of writing and writing whats on my mind.
I'd rather you ignored what I said or just assume I'm incorrect, I'm pretty adamant about not wanting to get into explaining typological theory in depth to anybody.
I'd rather you didn't throw it out there that you think I'm an INFP and then refuse to explain why.
That to me, is little irrational. Say something and refuse to bring arguments. Really though, I would prefer that you don't leave me hanging like that. Not because it's about INFP/INTP just in general. Like I mentioned; I want argumentation for just about anything and I expect people to be ready with their argumentations when they make a claim.
I don't understand what you're saying by this. I think I quite clearly was not going to reply not because I did not have an answer or because I didn't think anything needed further elaboration. But because I had not slept, was lazy and couldn't be bothered.
I meant that in response to the part I quoted from you, which was saying that you were getting tired of multi-quoting. I meant that by cutting out responses like saying "I agree with this point" when you agree with me on something, it may be easier to simply skip past responding to what you already agree with, in order to cut down on the amount of writing you have to do.
Lobstrich said:
Sure, it's easy to ignore. But I expect people to be ready with their arguments when the make claims. If you look back I did nothing but ask for explainations. Mainly because the claims were supported by ridiculous things like how I look. I do not intend to bash Phoenix (this is directed to you as well Phoenix. In case you're reading it) Because I know I keep mentioning how ridiculous I think it was and still is. But that's just how It is. I think Pod'Lair (or any argumentation that brings a little) is a joke.
Believe it or not I did read through your older posts and it was hardly "nothing but asking for explanations". In fact, you asked a mere 8 questions to Phoenix in all of your text.
Now... Why do you think I'm E?
And why do you think I'm F?
Either way, because I have opinions I'm an F?
And you know I do this, how?
How?
How do I react "F'ey"? How would you react "T'ey"?
I still don't see where I've brought in my values?
Were you not the one who said that Fs were not always "touchy feely"??
None of these ask questions in relation to her model, only in relation to her typing of you, which was why I specifically said it would be best to ask questions about her model. It was advice for the future.
Not that I agree with her typing methods necessarily, but I'd rather not get into that.
Lobstrich said:
I'd rather you didn't throw it out there that you think I'm an INFP and then refuse to explain why.
That to me, is little irrational. Say something and refuse to bring arguments. Really though, I would prefer that you don't leave me hanging like that. Not because it's about INFP/INTP just in general. Like I mentioned; I want argumentation for just about anything and I expect people to be ready with their argumentations when they make a claim.
I think you're using "irrational" in place of simply stating it annoys you.
I don't think entering a debate and saying "I agree he's probably got 'x' attributes, but the real issue here is that there's a misunderstanding" automatically makes the person saying that responsible for proving an argument somebody else started.
I believe that if I am to expect you to believe me then I am responsible for providing an explanation in regards to my claims, but because I never directed that statement towards you as an accusation and merely presented it as a belief (and not even one I expect you to believe), I am not responsible for proving it.
It's no different than what goes on in my head, aside from that you are now aware of it.
Regardless of what you may prefer here it's being a little idealistic to think I owe you an explanation just for believing this and agreeing with somebody else on it where it's visible to you.
This site uses cookies to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. We have no personalisation nor analytics --- especially no Google.
I've been playing with the idea of writing a detailed thread on "identity" recently though. A lot of thoughts have been coming together.
