Self typing patterns

[Architect]

A post recently reminded me of the patterns people often fall into when self typing, add your own

• S vs N If you are not sure whether you're an S or an N type, you are probably an S. N's rarely have any doubt of what they are, they're surrounded by S's so it couldn't be more obvious. S's sometimes identify with the N in their inferior, though I have rarely seen the converse (an INFJ thinking they might be an S due so the Se inferior) Speaking of which ..
• People often type themselves in their inferior. INFP's as thinking types (INTP's usually), INTP's sometimes type themselves as INFJ's (Fe types), etc.
• Strong extraverts typing themselves as introverts. Strong extraverts sometimes think about how they need down time and type themselves as introverts. It's simply that even they have limits and need a break. This is especially common with the ENF types such as ENFP's.
• IP's mistake themselves for Judgers and IJ's mistake themselves for Perceivers. It's a bit of an oddity that an IP has a dominant Judging function (introverted) but an extraverted Perceiving function. So an INTP is a Judging dominant (Ti) but is an outward perceiver. We make rules for ourselves but not for others.

 

[QuickTwist]

Hey Architect. I have something I would like say and hear what you have to say about it.

How does social anxiety register on the E/I spectrum? Can an extrovert have a social anxiety disorder?

 

[Architect]

How does social anxiety register on the E/I spectrum? Can an extrovert have a social anxiety disorder?

My take on this is that yes it's possible but probably unlikely. Most unlikely with EF's, secondarily with ES's and thirdly with EJ's. Therefore it might be the most likely with say ENTP's, but I still wouldn't think it's common.

Extraversion means that your focus and energy goes outward, by definition. Some extraverts can be so much their type that they really don't have much introspection or interior life at all. The external world literally is their mind. For example an ESTJ I know places huge mental capital in his physical objects. He has every piece of clothing he ever used practically, and as he is getting older is very focused with what is going to happen to the physical objects in his life. That's because they are his mind in a sense (c.f. Lenore Thompson on this subject).

Anyhow an extravert with social anxiety therefore would probably be in a complex or some pathological state. Or it could be through Type Suppression - typically in their childhood some event gave them contrary behavior to their natural inclination.

So yes, possible but unlikely, certainly not desirable and problematic.

 

[scenefinale]

A post recently reminded me of the patterns people often fall into when self typing, add your own

• S vs N If you are not sure whether you're an S or an N type, you are probably an S. N's rarely have any doubt of what they are, they're surrounded by S's so it couldn't be more obvious. S's sometimes identify with the N in their inferior, though I have rarely seen the converse (an INFJ thinking they might be an S due so the Se inferior) Speaking of which ..
• People often type themselves in their inferior. INFP's as thinking types (INTP's usually), INTP's sometimes type themselves as INFJ's (Fe types), etc.
• Strong extraverts typing themselves as introverts. Strong extraverts sometimes think about how they need down time and type themselves as introverts. It's simply that even they have limits and need a break. This is especially common with the ENF types such as ENFP's.
• IP's mistake themselves for Judgers and IJ's mistake themselves for Perceivers. It's a bit of an oddity that an IP has a dominant Judging function (introverted) but an extraverted Perceiving function. So an INTP is a Judging dominant (Ti) but is an outward perceiver. We make rules for ourselves but not for others.

I could add much more to this list but right now I'll just say one very prominent mistake I see is people who type themselves based on their functions of their dominant attitude. E.g. I've seen ENTPs who thought their Ne and Fe facing outward meant that they thought they were NF, and INTJs who thought their Ni and Fi inward so they concluded they were NF as well. I think my cognitive dyads model will alleviate a lot of that confusion, especially they way I will present it.

I've also seen numerous ESTJs tell me they are NTJs. Lots of people see "mastermind" and think "well, I am pretty smart" and just decide to tell everyone that's what they are. No really though, that's a thing. I've noticed it the most with ESTJs in my experience but I'm sure there are other types doing it as well, going with the type they think will impress they people they're around.

I've read enough "Guess the type" forums to know that almost nobody knows how to type others or themselves correctly, a huge part of the reason I don't trust previous MB "experiments" claiming to "debunk" the MBTI or whatever. Especially when they make no mentions of the CFs and just use the letters.

 

[MellifluousSky]

A post recently reminded me of the patterns people often fall into when self typing, add your own

• S vs N If you are not sure whether you're an S or an N type, you are probably an S. N's rarely have any doubt of what they are, they're surrounded by S's so it couldn't be more obvious. S's sometimes identify with the N in their inferior, though I have rarely seen the converse (an INFJ thinking they might be an S due so the Se inferior) Speaking of which ..
• People often type themselves in their inferior. INFP's as thinking types (INTP's usually), INTP's sometimes type themselves as INFJ's (Fe types), etc.
• Strong extraverts typing themselves as introverts. Strong extraverts sometimes think about how they need down time and type themselves as introverts. It's simply that even they have limits and need a break. This is especially common with the ENF types such as ENFP's.
• IP's mistake themselves for Judgers and IJ's mistake themselves for Perceivers. It's a bit of an oddity that an IP has a dominant Judging function (introverted) but an extraverted Perceiving function. So an INTP is a Judging dominant (Ti) but is an outward perceiver. We make rules for ourselves but not for others.

Oh man...Ne-Fi, in the absence of a strong judging function, self-typing is definitely

 

[MellifluousSky]

My take on this is that yes it's possible but probably unlikely. Most unlikely with EF's, secondarily with ES's and thirdly with EJ's. Therefore it might be the most likely with say ENTP's, but I still wouldn't think it's common.

Extraversion means that your focus and energy goes outward, by definition. Some extraverts can be so much their type that they really don't have much introspection or interior life at all. The external world literally is their mind. For example an ESTJ I know places huge mental capital in his physical objects. He has every piece of clothing he ever used practically, and as he is getting older is very focused with what is going to happen to the physical objects in his life. That's because they are his mind in a sense (c.f. Lenore Thompson on this subject).

Anyhow an extravert with social anxiety therefore would probably be in a complex or some pathological state. Or it could be through Type Suppression - typically in their childhood some event gave them contrary behavior to their natural inclination.

So yes, possible but unlikely, certainly not desirable and problematic.

Can you see your ESTJ at Enneagram 5? How can that type be mistaken for E5, unless they are crippled psychologically ... as you mention.

 

[Architect]

Can you see your ESTJ at Enneagram 5? How can that type be mistaken for E5, unless they are crippled psychologically ... as you mention.

Sorry but I don't know much about the Enneagram. Others I respect have the opinion that MBTI, the Enneagram and (that other one I forget the name of at the moment) are all versions of each other, but that MBTI is the most comprehensive, which I agree with after learning the others briefly, including that the Enneagram is probably an NF designed theory.

 

[Reluctantly]

^ The enneagram is a bit different though. It does kind of share a dual aspect with integration/disintegration, similar to function pairs (Ti/Fe, Te/Fi, Ni/Se, Si/Ne) and their patterns of neurosis, but it takes a more practical approach, looking at people from basic motivations, rather than trying to compartmentalize people into personalities, that may or may not be all that meaningful, depending on the person, not to mention the Forer Effect this can have.

But more importantly, enneagram at least has avoided one of the pitfalls of MBTI, where people try to explain everything about a person with it. It gets boring talking about MBTI when most people want to attribute it as a cause for everything about a person, as if there aren't other considerations to be made or thought about.

 

[QuickTwist]

I was going to ask in the Ask Architect thread but here's as good a place as any. Your comment almost makes me think I have Ne if I didn't know any better. I'm guessing its just a shadow function acting up because it stems from negativity and how I am being criticized as not being ISFP. So the question is, how does Fi seem to look like Ne sometimes?

^ Do you have an answer to this? Anyone?

 

[Reluctantly]

^ Shadow Ne is generally about seeing things in terms of malevolent forces or motivations. For example, it might portray someone as some kind of monster or sick individual for having certain qualities. It's pretty much Si subjectively interpreting extroverted qualities in a negative light.

I don't know if that's what you're looking for.

 

[MellifluousSky]

^ Shadow Ne is generally about seeing things in terms of malevolent forces or motivations. For example, it might portray someone as some kind of monster or sick individual for having certain qualities. It's pretty much Si subjectively interpreting extroverted qualities in a negative light.

I don't know if that's what you're looking for.

It might also indicate worst-case scenarios or paranoia.

 

[QuickTwist]

I was thinking about this while reading both your posts and it occurred to me that Ne (in an ISFP) feeds off the negative emotions from the Fi.. or reversed.. or it loops in mentally unhealthy individuals. Does that make sense? I don't usually hold grudges against people or ever stay mad at them for any significant amount of time, but sometimes some people scare the crap out of me. Paranoia about an individual occurs often for me.

 

[Reluctantly]

It might also indicate worst-case scenarios or paranoia.

Well, I think that paranoia fits more for the judging functions because it rationalizes that others are out to get them. Worst case scenarios also sounds like it involves some kind of rationale to reach the conclusion that a worst case scenario is likely or is going to occur.

Perceiving functions are more neurotic on how they view a particular thing, but not really on how they rationalize them, if that makes sense. Hence why they are irrational because they are seen, without requiring rationale, yet are used to rationalize. For example, an atom is perceived to have electrons that orbit a nucleus. So one could rationalize how they orbit that nucleus by explaining them through valence shells. But the basic perception of orbiting the nucleus was needed before anything could be rationalized, whether the perception was accurate or not. Jung had decided that philosophically the irrational perceiving functions are considered axiomatic to reason, to the judging functions, because of this ontological dilemma.

 

[QuickTwist]

Well, I think that paranoia fits more for the judging functions because it rationalizes that others are out to get them. Worst case scenarios also sounds like it involves some kind of rationale to reach the conclusion that a worst case scenario is likely or is going to occur.

Perceiving functions are more neurotic on how they view a particular thing, but not really on how they rationalize them, if that makes sense. Hence why they are irrational because they are seen, without requiring rationale, yet are used to rationalize. For example, an atom is perceived to have electrons that orbit a nucleus. So one could rationalize how they orbit that nucleus by explaining them through valence shells. But the basic perception of orbiting the nucleus was needed before anything could be rationalized, whether the perception was accurate or not. Jung had decided that philosophically the irrational perceiving functions are considered axiomatic to reason, to the judging functions, because of this ontological dilemma.

So would you say P doms are not rational and J doms are more so? So like a psychopath would be J dom and bipolar would be P dom?

 

[The Limitless One]

I don't really see a problem with self typing. I have no desire to be any 'way'. I didn't even know what the letters meant until after testing. As long as you just be honest with yourself about your ideals and draw from certain situations you have been in to determine the correct responses in regard to your character then your results will be accurate. Afterall, no-one knows you better than you know yourself. Honesty is the key here.

 

[nanook]

Do you usually feel drawn towards people and find yourself waiting for the next party? Yes, in comparsion to the other monks in my monastery. I feel i should have some human interaction now and then in 2015. I am looking forward to the next sylvester party since i skipped it in 2014. I am clearly extoverted. Yeah, but how about in comparsion to other more wordly people?! What? I don't really know any of those. They are sort of reclusive aren't they? When i go to town and ask for money, they will ususally look away. No, i'm clearly more extroverted than they. Many cold people out there. And nobody ever approaches me. They dissapoint me. When i see someone asking for money, i allways approach them and ask them if they know about the Lord. Most of the time i'm practically dying from lonelyness, i'm telling you. I can't understand introverts. How can they enjoy solitude? I always have to pray, to distract myself. I don't feel so alone, when Jesus is with me.

 

[QuickTwist]

Oh, you... you'll make me blush. J/K

But seriously, Not everyone is as sheltered as you you know. I know that you know what I am talking about.

 

[The Limitless One]

Do you usually feel drawn towards people and find yourself waiting for the next party? Yes, in comparsion to the other monks in my monastery. I feel i should have some human interaction now and then in 2015. I am looking forward to the next sylvester party since i skipped it in 2014. I am clearly extoverted. Yeah, but how about in comparsion to other more wordly people?! What? I don't really know any of those. They are sort of reclusive aren't they? When i go to town and ask for money, they will ususally look away. No, i'm clearly more extroverted than they. Many cold people out there. And nobody ever approaches me. They dissapoint me. When i see someone asking for money, i allways approach them and ask them if they know about the Lord. Most of the time i'm practically dying from lonelyness, i'm telling you. I can't understand introverts. How can they enjoy solitude? I always have to pray, to distract myself. I don't feel so alone, when Jesus is with me.

What was this? lol

 

[Cherry Cola]

the truth: monks are stupid and waste their lifes coming to basic insights which can be had by taking some fucking psychedelics and reading some books not wasting ur fucking life, the only difference is their realizations is complete passitivity, in their world nothing changes. They'd have us learn nothing more and do nothing to progress anything. They cost society money by fucking requiring free food from locals and shit. Fuck monks.

 

[nexion]

So would you say P doms are not rational and J doms are more so? So like a psychopath would be J dom and bipolar would be P dom?

I would say that there are perhaps correlations amongst types and certain psychological disorders, but there is, of course, no hard rule concerning it. There are many potential ways various functions could coalesce and materialize into neuroses.

It is also worth noting that MBTI and pure Jungian typology have certain incongruities (even if they otherwise exist quite harmoniously), the most notable of which is MBTI's fixation on extroversion. Because of this, a Jungian rational would be a MBTI judger if the first function is extroverted (eg. ESTJ), but an MBTI perceiver if the first function is introverted (eg. INTP). The same is respectively true for Jungian irrationals regarding introversion (eg. ISFJ) and extroversion (eg. ENTP).

The rational / irrational dichotomy is an important and far-reaching dichotomy in Jungian typology, one that is somewhat obfuscated by MBTI. More on this.

 

[nanook]

They are called differently and as a result imagined differently, by readers who have not yet learned to connect written word with real people. It's very unfortunate. Has mislead me for years.

But all we really need to sort out the bullshit is sixteen real life people and accurate knowledge of their functions.

I wish there was a single website that can deliver such samples. No dead people, no fictional characters, no actors, no authors, 16 people of similar intelligence who can be observed acting in authentic ways.

Then we can learn to see what abstractions like mbti-p or adaptive or rational actually mean.

Somebody could help us see what the abstractions are about, using a language that can be interpreted, by connecting it with those solid examples.

And we could forget about concrete-picuture bullshit cliches such as who cleans up their room of comes too late to a meeting. And fill out the gaps that are left by abstractions. Such as knowing that Ni doms are perusing subjective process goals and Si doms are perusing refinement of practice.

These are still believes that i hold, based on knowing a small sample of people from different contexts. People who may be on different stages of development, coincidentally. Such differences might be very misleading. The only ISTP i know close up is so psychotic, he might be an INFJ, it's not always easy to differentiate between dominant and shadow, from the outside.

The other day i read a text (on personality cafe) by Naranjo (a very experienced psychologist) about enneagram nine and it was a miserable sight, despite being filled with interesting quotes. it appeared as if the man can't tell the difference between carl jungs description of Se types and someone else's description of enneagram nine. It may be true that esfp have traits of enneagram nine (unlike estp), but the similarity is coincidental and due to Fi and not Se.

 

[QuickTwist]

Nanook, what you say makes a lot of sense, almost always I should add. I have had the thought before where "Let try and actually see what these 16 types actually look like" but I gave up trying to do anything about it because its never going to happen. It would be really cool to have that kind of info about people for sure, but the thing is, there are so few people who can actually type themselves accurately that it would almost be better to have a psychologist do it.. and then the BS would continue on that path until it too gets bureaucratic and shit...