You are good at being there when you are suppose to be there in my experience.
You rarely get out of line with what is appropriate, but at the same time, you seem very confident in what you say. If there is a disagreement, you usually stick to your guns.
Wisdom is a hallmark to what you contribute to this forum, and as such, you seem grounded in reality and are not too far away from what many consider to be ideal.
I appreciate what you have to add to this forum and hope you stick around until you feel it is no longer needed.
I believe you to be an INTP with a huge emphasis on Enneagram 9w1.
I dearly hope you get more feedback from this thread and that it is a success in you eyes.
You are the most definite INTP on the forum. You are definitely not an Ni user nor do you have F in the aux. You are equipped with solid reasoning and analytical skills but sometimes you have trouble understanding that people and the world doesn't operate by logic, leading you to speak of your own idealism in place of reality, expecting it to function for other people as it has for you. This has been evident in some of your discussion with Jennywocky on topics concerning social issues. Nevertheless there's compassion in your posts. INTP.
You are the most definite INTP on the forum. You are definitely not an Ni user nor do you have Ti. You are equipped with solid reasoning and analytical skills but sometimes you have trouble understanding that people and the world doesn't operate by logic, leading you to speak of your own idealism in place of reality, expecting it to function for other people as it has for you. This has been evident in some of your discussion with Jennywocky on topics concerning social issues. Nevertheless there's compassion in your posts. INTP.
even my humor is exhibited through purposely creating dry contradiction and logical error, or possibly false relations that look logical.
I wonder what others see in it. It is a select number of people who laugh at it. I wonder if some perceive my actions as actual indications of me being thick in the head not seeing the creative twist in the works.
My incomplete understanding of MBTI and functions + Lack of knowledge of grayman = inconclusive.
Though, I kind of sense grayman as somewhat up-tight. I dunno if that's just me. And I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I can sometimes be up-tight as well. Maybe I'm projecting.
Though it was my impression that INTP's are not very up-tight whatsoever. They spontaneously laugh things off easily, and it's hard to 'get to' an INTP. INTP's are reserved, quiet and keep to themselves, but in a dampened way, they are like mischievous clowns.
I'm guessing that's because of Fi being as low as it will go in the functional stack. When your that far away from your personal feelings, things are less likely to rub off on you. Nonchalant, aloof, and sometimes a spark of teasing playfulness owing to Fe.
Attacking an INTP personally doesn't work too well. Do that, and the joke ends up on you. Critique how they think though, and you might get a reaction.
It's not that INTP's are constantly trying to control their feelings with rationalism. It's that they want to feel, they are striving to feel. Feeling is an aspiration to them, not a hindrance that they are trying to control.
But I dunno, perhaps these behaviours have nothing to do with types whatsoever.
Though, I kind of sense grayman as somewhat up-tight. I dunno if that's just me. And I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I can sometimes be up-tight as well. Maybe I'm projecting.
What attached emotions might correlate with perception, irritable, angry, sensitive, jittery, worried, anxious, or something more specific to my actions?
Internal judging process divorced from consistent external data sources. All the rules are constructed theoretically, so they might or might not reflect the tangible reality of others.
What attached emotions might correlate with perception, irritable, angry, sensitive, jittery, worried, anxious, or something more specific to my actions?
Sorry, I am obsessed with trying to define characteristics of the IxxP's. I think it's time I let the obsession go and work on other things.
I remember typing someone ISTP, and he was a little bit up-tight about morals, respect, loyalty, and equal treatment and such. <- All good beliefs btw. He is an older guy, so perhaps that comes with maturity and age.
I'll say you could be INTP. And tbh, I think you are an all-right guy.
I've noticed a struggle in my Fi friend that fits with Fi around here... the idea of settling down, sitting still, and being tied to something, specifically a family, seems against his nature, like dying but not quite as bad as that.
I am having trouble giving it definition because it is so contrary to my nature.
It's not that INTP's are constantly trying to control their feelings with rationalism. It's that they want to feel, they are striving to feel. Feeling is an aspiration to them, not a hindrance that they are trying to control.
I would add that they do indeed feel emotions very strongly (and it can be manifested as internal anger or resentment, for example -- being emotional doesn't just mean sappy, touchy-feely, etc), but aspire to express better.
I think it is important to remember that F has little (or nothing) to do with the emotional capacity of an individual, it has more to do with values.
Painting with a broad brush here, but generally XF types value human-related issues (more socially involved) and XT types value object-related issues (which can include human related issues, however from a distant perspective - they avoid interpersonal dealings and are not that interested in helping humans -- more interested in helping humanity in their progress forward). But they are both as emotionally capable as each other, depending on how comfortable they are with expressing it.
As far as Grayman is concerned I have no idea, but I tentatively agree with ESC: PiJe
Honestly I could keep going but most everyone would just accuse me of oversimplifying things. Of course most people want their feelings to have more meaning and would feel the need to protect the idea that it is not so simple.
Just a bit of cat and mouse. The feeling I was examining in my perceptions of you and others while reading this would best be communicated to you as "No one likes to be looked at like a scientist examining a rat in a cage." Sadly this is an actual representation to how I see the world. Like I am doing with this most recent quote, I continually alter my explanations and comments to fit within the perceptions of others. I find this necessary in real life. On this forum, an INTP forum, I have become desirous of expressing my view without alteration.
My usage of emotional control is not about the suppression or wrestling of emotions. These are dangerous and non-productive methods.
Not to type your eyes to sleep but perhaps this is important to understanding me.
I influence my emotions through the guidance and understanding to produce better results in my life. I do not try to feel or not feel and simply accept my strength of feelings as a part of who I am, which can be strong as iron or non-existent.
I defined my emotions through an equation that was produced through introspection and tested against others to determine it's accuracy. I determined it to be highly accurate in anticipating other people and recognizing the variables that drive them.
Emotions are a product of how you percieve the eviromentaffecting what you value.
EXAMPLE: You are angry when you think a person is verbally attacking your daughter.
The first step to changing my emotions is changing the perceiving variable. Perception is the most important because it can not only alter how you perceive the environment but how it is being affected and also recognizing that you value something.
Taking a step back and perceiving one can come up with other possibilities.
EXAMPLE: You are concerned when you think a person is reprimanding your daughter for walking out in the street in front of a car.
Honestly I could keep going but most everyone would just accuse me of oversimplifying things. Of course most people want their feelings to have more meaning and would feel the need to protect the idea that it is not so simple.
I like your equation. That's pretty well the same thing I learned in CBT, and did help me a lot.
For me, it's a fine blade for all the little beasties. But then a quick glance to the south, where the real nasty awaits, for another day when I attain a much finer-crafted excalibur.
The first step to changing my emotions is changing the perceiving variable. Perception is the most important because it can not only alter how you perceive the environment but how it is being affected and also recognizing that you value something.
You really need a formula to figure out what you value?
While perceptions can often be overblown, sometimes perceptions are accurate depictions of reality - forcing yourself to change your perception is just deluding yourself.
Maybe your daughter really was being verbally attacked and if so, you'd be right to become angry/protective. What you need to ascertain isn't some formula-derived best course of action - you need to ascertain what's actual reality. One can be angry and still act appropriately, there's nothing wrong with being angry about something unless you act rashly out of anger.
As it stands, this formula sounds exactly like a way to suppress emotions. You're actively trying to change them into something else by changing how you see a situation.
And yes your responses to the questions and inevitable arguments are relevant to ascertaining what type you are.
Grayman said:
I defined my emotions through an equation that was produced through introspection and tested against others to determine it's accuracy. I determined it to be highly accurate in anticipating other people and recognizing the variables that drive them.
In total honesty, judging by your interactions on this forum I think you're absolutely horrible at recognizing the driving variables behind other people. Both on a personal and general level.
Probably because you view people's problems almost exclusively as problems of their own "incorrect" perceptions as opposed to real, actual problems.
Classic Ti conception of emotions as things which need to be governed by an external rationality. How da fuck is Grayman Fi again?
As Redbaron pointed out this guy needs a formula to figure his emotions out. This is NOT dominant Fi. Oh and Grayman isn't uptight he's just a bit paranoid, which is partly a consequence of his somewhat lackluster ability to read people in terms of intentions, tone etc (ie emotional content).
For gods sake just read his last post. Can it get anymore obvious?
My quantifying perception's importance is not a statement meant to indicate that it should be the only one used but instead the first of the variables to be used. This small statment is a concept better known as 'think before you act'.
Its a Pi vs Ji thing. Ni doms aren't as concerned with aquiring algorithm's for reasoning as Ji doms, that shit sorts itself out for them because they have a natural sense of the proportionality of disparate entities in regards to each other (ergo reality), instead their focus tends to lie on devising methods and even routines to allow for the most efficient intake of information (ergo learning since Ni processes semi-autonomously).
Someone who's dominant function is sensing will decide his course of action based on what he perceives to be the actual nature of reality whereas a J-dom will be prone to perform what the sensing Dom will perceive as an artificial altering of reality in order for it to conform with his internal standards.
I think Redbaron is kinda missing your point by getting hung up on the example you used. If your daughter actually is getting raped your priority should not be to alter your perception of said occurrence in order to be able to ignore it comfortably. Still I get what you meant and it's a clinically proven way of coping with shit.
Nevertheless Redbaron is totally right anyway you's maximum intp face it fucker, sry if this post is incomprehensible
Its a Pi vs Ji thing. Ni doms aren't as concerned with aquiring algorithm's for reasoning as Ji doms, that shit sorts itself out for them because they have a natural sense of the proportionality of disparate entities in regards to each other (ergo reality), instead their focus tends to lie on devising methods and even routines to allow for the most efficient intake of information (ergo learning since Ni processes semi-autonomously).
Someone who's dominant function is sensing will decide his course of action based on what he perceives to be the actual nature of reality whereas a J-dom will be prone to perform what the sensing Dom will perceive as an artificial altering of reality in order for it to conform with his internal standards.
I think Redbaron is kinda missing your point by getting hung up on the example you used. If your daughter actually is getting raped your priority should not be to alter your perception of said occurrence in order to be able to ignore it comfortably. Still I get what you meant and it's a clinically proven way of coping with shit.
Nevertheless Redbaron is totally right anyway you's maximum intp face it fucker, sry if this post is incomprehensible
I am sorry, can you define the Je,Ji,Pe,Pi terminology for me. I would assume Ji is the equivalent of Ti Fi and Pi is Ni and Si etc... indicating dom functions.
I was called PiJe by some in the thread. I could then assume they were refering to IxxJ?
You place me as Ixxp.
I originally tested a year or two ago as an INTP with 90% likelyhood. Over the course of that time recently got the same results except I was 20% more extraverted than before. Your perception of me accurately aligns with those test results.
Honestly I could keep going but most everyone would just accuse me of oversimplifying things. Of course most people want their feelings to have more meaning and would feel the need to protect the idea that it is not so simple.
Just a bit of cat and mouse. The feeling I was examining in my perceptions of you and others while reading this would best be communicated to you as "No one likes to be looked at like a scientist examining a species of rat." sadly my first expression of this observation is an actual representation to how I see the world. Like I am doing with this most recent quote, I continually alter my explanations and comments to fit within the perceptions of others. I find this necessary in real life. On this forum, an INTP forum, I have become desirous of expressing my view without alteration.
I can't really discount that Grayman could be Fi. Namely INTJ or ISTJ.
Your response to what you value seems to be born of some sort of trauma more than the patterns of any specific type. Regardless of type, it's typical for people who've been abused or traumatized to invalidate their own emotions and therefore others by extension. Which is something you seem to do quite regularly.
Not only that, the bulk of your posts (when you really get going) seems to come in situations where some subjective, internal value of yours has been violated and you spring into action to, 'defend the little guy'. Also you remind me of certain IxTJ's I know when you interpret people as attacking you, when they're simply being direct and assertive in reference to factual or observable patterns.
It's a pattern I've noticed in several other victims of abuse and violence, that they respond on the surface in a way that appears unemotional. It's like an automatic defense mechanism to convince themselves that they aren't heavily swayed or affected by their own emotions. So they invalidate the importance of healthily expressing powerful emotions like anger and they see people who are assertive or borderline aggressive as being 'unstable' and being personal with them. When that's not really the case at all.
So therefore such individuals try to invalidate what the other person is saying, not based on logic, reason or facts - but on the fact that the person is being swayed by their emotional investment. Which really isn't the case, it's a projection.
You get very caught up in the emotions of the people involved and also the emotions that the topic of discussion itself brings up, as opposed to making an effort to focus on the rational, logical underpinnings of the argument.
I might go with INTJ if I had to hazard a guess. I honestly think it's irresponsible to bother typing people who've been abused and grown up around abuse, without accurately adjusting for the way such experiences manifest in people behaviorally.
I honestly think it's irresponsible to bother typing people who've been abused and grown up around abuse, without accurately adjusting for the way such experiences manifest in people behaviorally.
MBTI isn't supposed to measure health but imo the foundation is just being politically correct as real life types would exist on scales. Still, if possible psych evaluations should be differentiated from type evaluations as the former requires more rigorous and thorough examinations than casual observations.
So I would like to ask, @Grayman:
How do you see yourself? What information about you do you think others don't pick up on or misunderstand? How are you outside the forum?
MBTI isn't supposed to measure health but imo the foundation is just being politically correct as real life types would exist on scales. Still, if possible psych evaluations should be differentiated from type evaluations as the former requires more rigorous and thorough examinations than casual observations.
It's not that I'm measuring health. I'm commenting on the fact that people in the thread are attributing certain patterns of behaviour to a type. In my experience and as far as I can ascertain, the patterns being described are actually manifestations of abuse. I've seen it in people I know who've been abused and it's something corroborated by various sources.
Still I agree that it's better to ask questions, although I did that and Grayman didn't bother to answer the important ones.
I'll start with this. I went over the first part with the thought of I will get back to that and then forgot about it.
Why to control emotions: So your emotions properly reflect what is going on in your environment and can better allow you to react in a way that will properly deal with your situation instead of make it worse or hurt others unnecessarily.
When I do go through a situation where my emotions cause others pain I notify them of why I am upset and apologize to them for any pain I might be causing them. I don't think it polite or respectful to throw your emotions around without concern for how it might be affecting others. Such a thing is like pushing your way through a crowded hallway instead of being patient and respecting everyone's personal space.
If I see the guy pushing his way through the emotional hallway upsetting people and making them feel uncomfortable but they are too sensitive to say something. I will go up to him and tell him to wait his turn and be more respectful of everyone waiting in line.
Your response to what you value seems to be born of some sort of trauma more than the patterns of any specific type. Regardless of type, it's typical for people who've been abused or traumatized to invalidate their own emotions and therefore others by extension. Which is something you seem to do quite regularly.
I don't validate emotions that would be lead a person to self destructive behavior. I would try to change it if I could but it obviously not in my control. You may have to be more specific...
So therefore such individuals try to invalidate what the other person is saying, not based on logic, reason or facts - but on the fact that the person is being swayed by their emotional investment. Which really isn't the case, it's a projection.
It's not about the emotions but the values attached to the emotions. A person who has a strong value toward something isn't likely to be swayed and I see no reason to try and cause them undo strife unless this value conflicts with others inside them causing them confusion and internal struggles therefor mixed or paralyzed emotions or it can lead them or others around them to greater issues later.
I am more concerned with process of debate then acknowledging things that are primarily a product of their values out of necessity instead of utility. Similar to how you moved the transgender, gay debate to a more personal nature when I wanted to address the actual functions and causes on a fundamental level similar to what you would find in a text book.
Not only that, the bulk of your posts (when you really get going) seems to come in situations where some subjective, internal value of yours has been violated and you spring into action to, 'defend the little guy'. Also you remind me of certain IxTJ's I know when you interpret people as attacking you, when they're simply being direct and assertive in reference to factual or observable patterns.
I am fine with direct or assertive but not direct and assertive without concern for how it is worded or phrased.
I could say: You are being an ignorant person and this perception you have is stupid.
Or I could say: You don't have all the facts and are coming to false conclusions. Here are the facts.
The first is blatant disregard for the emotions, intelligence, and the views of the other person.
The second simply directs the individual to the actual problem and bypasses all hte judgments.
This has been my main issue with you and our interaction. It isn't this obvious but there is a measure of it in a lot of your comments. I do appreciate our interaction as it is now though and it is considerably easier to address your comments and questions without dealing with any added irritation.
Others don't seem to value the impersonal discussions which I had thought was the hallmark of being an INTP. I have enough interaction with people and emotions in real life so when I want to discuss methods of how to deal with things I try to do so from a approach to be objective and to simply find patterns and catalog them to see how they fit in real life like did with my equation. It is enjoyable and something that I feel is missing and not found often in discussions with others around me.
Similar to how you moved the transgender, gay debate to a more personal nature when I wanted to address the actual functions and causes on a fundamental level similar to what you would find in a text book.
Yeah well this is pretty much exactly what I mean when I say you seem to interpret things incorrectly and get people completely wrong, then try to invalidate their arguments by insinuating that they're being swayed by their own emotions/personal investment.
Not only that, you've got it hilariously wrong. From a quick glance back at that thread, all you ever talked about were your own personal values and all the ways that transgender people don't live up to them.
In spoiler is my opening post towards you in the transgender thread. Where exactly is it personal? It's just a collection of information on various trends (and their instigators) within the LGBT community, followed by reference to recent scientific findings. There's nothing personal in there.
redbaron said:
Suicide and depression are rampant in the LGBT community, fuelled largely by anti-gay zealotry. Anti-gay movements give credibility (in their perspective) to the actions of homophobes and perpetuates antagonism against gays.
There have been and still are "clinics" where gay children/teenagers were sent to be "cured". Some people go willingly. Most of the time it just makes things worse because now instead of simply being different, they're now also labelled as being defective in some way - they're gay not because it's a natural human phenomena but because they're actually flawed. Whatever issues they faced before are just exacerbated by this process.
Some people appear to get "cured" as Jenny noted, then just end up reverting back to preferring same sex relations anyway. This mentality of being able to change someone's sexuality as though it's a "choice" has been around for a long time and has done nothing but damage.
Even scientific studies are starting to crop up, documenting homosexual tendencies in various other mammals and all over the animal kingdom. Rams partnering exclusively with other rams for example.
I know you're not talking about shaming people, but that's not the point. The point is that even if it were possible to change someone to being heteronormative - why should they? No one's under any onus to change their sexual preferences and there's nothing wrong with being gay, bi, trans or any permutation thereof.
The personal actually started when you started posting.
For example this statement:
Grayman said:
The problem is that they believe that they 'are' a role vs they have one of many roles in life. Being a man is just a small role I have in life but my life is not just being a man. It is like this with careers also. A person I know thinks they 'are' a dentist and that is their role in life and when they cannot get a job they feel they have failed in life and go into depression. They are wrong.
You think you know what the problem is by conflating a transsexual identity to a career choice, presume to know the reason trans people get depressed and then go on to say categorically that, "they are wrong". That's about as personal as you can get.
Further comments:
Grayman said:
Everyone lives in a society and in society it is never just you or what you want even when concerning your roles. They want to be fully individualistic while unwilling to compromise to exist and be fully accepted in society.
Now I'm not condoning suicide by any stretch, but in that thread previous people such as Jennywocky and myself had highlighted what caused these people to become suicidal in the first place. You ignored all of this in lieu of making a point about how the problem with trans people is that they make too big a deal out of their roles and are wrong for doing so.
So let's be real: the reason you're involved in that discussion is because trans people in your perception are doing something that violates your own subjective values of what is fair. Probably also in part because you think they could do things "better". Yet in your view, they just want a free pass and they don't want to make a compromise to be accepted.
Which is what everything in that thread continuously came back to for you. That trans people aren't doing the right thing as you see it. I dare say that the only reason you'd think I was being personal was because you're projecting.
This particular post and most of the things you post seem to be directly motivated by things to do with your own subjective values. It's hard to say what the specific reason would be, but I think it's more telling of inferior or tertiary Ji than a dominant one.
Seeing as I'm pretty sure you're introverted, I'll go with INTJ.
Grayman said:
Others don't seem to value the impersonal discussions which I had thought was the hallmark of being an INTP.
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.
? Do you just use mbti types as vague character distinction independent of functions?
even my humor is exhibited through purposely creating dry contradiction and logical error, or possibly false relations that look logical.
