Type me, my label printer malfunctioned

[Lith]

I've known about the MBTI for about two years now, and I've scarfed down walls and brick a$$ walls of text(so, maybe I've been probing..) and I still can't decide and it drives me nucking futs. I always get once certain type, and I don't feel like that type(I said "feel", sue me.) Now, I'm not going to start off by announcing my type because that'll only accomplish a preconceived notion to what I could be and.. I'd rather start with a blank canvas.

I procrastinate like motherF.
It's an inevitable process, just happens.

I am open-minded
No idea is dismissed!(lest I already see a major fault, though if the main idea has potential, it can be manipulated into the right format)

I can't pull myself down to earth(sometimes it's the opposite), it's almost like I have a large white cone around my neck, simultaneously blocking my view and blinding me. I daydream an awful lot, it's just the oddest compilation of thoughts, and I'm getting to think I just think that way because seldom do I have real, nitty-gritty concious thought.. it's hard to explain. My thinking is like an effortless flow from a water tap, not much pressure and not just a drip, in contrast to pure concious thought that is like pumping for water and can be related to speaking; consciously speaking out loud, but in your head. Many times, I will just spew something out of my mouth that seems almost alien.. just the oddest of thoughts. It's been said that I have an odd way of speaking, not accent wise, but colourful diction; making odd analogies, adjectives, structure. Also, speaking of word choice, I am absolutely horrible at expressing myself in words.
Depending on my general mood, the whole of my speech will be very different and fills many archetypes.. never static.

I am objective and a slight misanthrope. 'nough said here.

I spend most of my time by myself, I can't spend time with others, it bores me to the very brink of death, never letting me cross the line because that would surely relieve the pain and suffering.

Holy social akwardice. Not a fat chance in hell, can I say something without making it seem like a computer with an unnecessary extra keyboard. I must think before I say something, but I can't! As I mentioned before, that's just not how my mind rolls. So, I stay away from people. In turn, I am on the borderline of being assertive. I also can't read whether I'm boring someone or not, which automatically makes me think I am. This really fits with how much of a crazy conspiracy theorist I am. I keep my laptop camera taped, I delete my history(as if that would help), I feel like my every move is being watched, and I assume that someone is always onto me.
Once, I was out with a friend and I saw a parked car, down the street that looked strangely like my dad's, so I figured he was spying on me and waved.. It wasn't his car.

I can't tell whether I see the big picture or not. I may lean to detail oriented, but beware the fact I said that I couldn't tell.. I can't focus on details, especially when dealing with completing something with loose ends; It's just so monotonous.. to work on the details. This is the reason why all of my art pieces are unfinished. I never finish anything because I get bored of it.

I must know what I'm getting into before I do whatever it is I'm doing, otherwise I feel unprepared, worried, and I feel as if I forgot something. In this way I like to be "safe than sorry", quite cautious, and secure. Though, remember this is speaking in terms of avoiding menial nuisances and troubles.

I spend alot of my time researching different things, and I crave intelligence and understanding. It's like an I MUST KNOW feeling, equivalent to a zombie's uncanny, "MUST EAT BRAINS"
I also have a good relationship with theory.

I often compare things to the way I noticed them before. ex: look at something and notice they look like someone else.

organization is important-yet for me, the ever most elusive organization flees me like a dog flees its fleas.

-It's my decision to when I should follow the rules. If there's no meaning to the rhyme, then it mustn't rhyme just to rhyme.


Edit: So, it's slightly longer than it should be.

 

[sammael]

So... You don't feel like an INTP?

 

[cheese]

Sounds pretty xNTP to me. (Based on functions and the level of sophistication at which you described your use of them.)

But the problem here is that, given the fact that *you* know so much about MBTI, it's likely that your descriptions have been coloured by that. So maybe I'm just reading a good re-interpretation of your life through an MBTI lens.

Here's my analysis of your text:

Spoiler

I procrastinate like motherF.
It's an inevitable process, just happens.
--- Doesn't necessarily mean anything.

I am open-minded
No idea is dismissed! --- N(lest I already see a major fault, though if the main idea has potential, it can be manipulated into the right format) ---- high Ti (though perhaps also NiTe?)

I can't pull myself down to earth(sometimes it's the opposite), it's almost like I have a large white cone around my neck, simultaneously blocking my view and blinding me. I daydream an awful lot, it's just the oddest compilation of thoughts, and I'm getting to think I just think that way because seldom do I have real, nitty-gritty concious thought.. it's hard to explain. My thinking is like an effortless flow from a water tap, not much pressure and not just a drip, in contrast to pure concious thought that is like pumping for water and can be related to speaking; consciously speaking out loud, but in your head. --- This is J, therefore you're more likely P. Many times, I will just spew something out of my mouth that seems almost alien.. just the oddest of thoughts. It's been said that I have an odd way of speaking, not accent wise, but colourful diction; making odd analogies, adjectives, structure. --- likely N influence Also, speaking of word choice, I am absolutely horrible at expressing myself in words. --- likely not ExxJ; probably not IxxJ either based on other parts of post, therefore xxxP. J's are more naturally able to structure their thoughts into easier expression in thought because they have either Te or Fe as dom/aux, which are communicative, structured functions used to alter the environment.
Depending on my general mood, the whole of my speech will be very different and fills many archetypes.. never static. Sounds like directionless Fe.

I am objective and a slight misanthrope. 'nough said here.

I spend most of my time by myself, I can't spend time with others, it bores me to the very brink of death, never letting me cross the line because that would surely relieve the pain and suffering.
--- Doesn't necessarily show anything MBTI-wise, just shows you don't like spending time with the people you know.

Holy social akwardice. Not a fat chance in hell, can I say something without making it seem like a computer with an unnecessary extra keyboard. I must think before I say something, but I can't! --- Sounds like Ne, or maybe just lack of mental discipline As I mentioned before, that's just not how my mind rolls. So, I stay away from people. In turn, I am on the borderline of being assertive. I also can't read whether I'm boring someone or not, which automatically makes me think I am. This really fits with how much of a crazy conspiracy theorist I am. I keep my laptop camera taped, I delete my history(as if that would help), I feel like my every move is being watched, and I assume that someone is always onto me.
Once, I was out with a friend and I saw a parked car, down the street that looked strangely like my dad's, so I figured he was spying on me and waved.. It wasn't his car.
--- This just makes you 'weird' but it doesn't necessarily show anything beyond high probability of N (which your whole post shows). Although there might be a possibility that your fear of being watched is because of weak/inferior Fe.

I can't tell whether I see the big picture or not. I may lean to detail oriented, but beware the fact I said that I couldn't tell.. I can't focus on details, especially when dealing with completing something with loose ends; It's just so monotonous.. to work on the details. This is the reason why all of my art pieces are unfinished. I never finish anything because I get bored of it. Hm, I don't think Ns are incapable of appreciating or being good with detail, it's more literal/concrete/real-world detail that's the problem. Ns might have highly developed and extremely detailed conceptual worlds/theories/structures, but be terrible with details while doing the dishes for example. At the same time they (or any other type I think) can be extremely finicky about things like dirt, or symmetry, etc. These are individual things I think, not strongly related to type.
What this paragraph of yours says to me is that you prefer initation to completion, which is an NP trait, because Ne will spin them off in multiple directions.

I must know what I'm getting into before I do whatever it is I'm doing, otherwise I feel unprepared, worried, and I feel as if I forgot something. In this way I like to be "safe than sorry", quite cautious, and secure. Though, remember this is speaking in terms of avoiding menial nuisances and troubles.
-- This is actually fairly typical of INTPs (also Enneagram 5) - being scared they'll end up spent, and trying to be prepared or at least know what they're getting into so their use of energy is economical, efficient and doesn't leave them dry. Being cautious doesn't make you an SJ.

I spend alot of my time researching different things, and I crave intelligence and understanding. It's like an I MUST KNOW feeling, equivalent to a zombie's uncanny, "MUST EAT BRAINS"
I also have a good relationship with theory.
---- Probably NT

I often compare things to the way I noticed them before. ex: look at something and notice they look like someone else.
Comparing is low level Si, using data from the past to stabilise the present is high level Si. This is only a tiny snippet so it doesn't necessarily mean anything about you, but it might suggest your Si is low level, which fits in with the INxP description.

organization is important-yet for me, the ever most elusive organization flees me like a dog flees its fleas.

-It's my decision to when I should follow the rules. If there's no meaning to the rhyme, then it mustn't rhyme just to rhyme. --- Lead with subjective, ie individual not group, discernment (Ti or Fi). Either that or Ni, which is also subjective. Subjective (ie introverted) functions cause a more individualistic attitude towards the world. This is true for Si as well, but as Si's focus is on recreating the past using the concrete data it's stored that *actually happened*, it's less likely to be unusual or counter-culture. However your attitude towards rules seems to be focused more on making sure they make sense which is about discernment (T/F) rather than making sure they fit with your world vision (Ni/Si).


Edit: So, it's slightly longer than it should be.

Based on this I'd guess xNTP, though an NJ is also a possibility. But that analysis could change with more data.

 

[Auburn]

Hiya, welcome.

For what a first impression is worth..
You sound like a Perception dominant. If I were to narrow it down further I'd say an N dominant. Further still, probably an Ne dominant. And further than that I can't say..

Possible types: ENTP, ESTP, ENFP, INFJ

 

[Lith]

So... You don't feel like an INTP?

ISTP feels like me, though I constantly test INTJ. I don’t feel like I’m an N for reasons listed below.

reading a good re-interpretation of your life through an MBTI lens.

Maybe, since you only have what I give you. Even if I was to BS my content, you still have clues such as the way I may phrase my sentences, the literary devices that I may use, or even the way I make certain mistakes or understand certain things; those aspects are harder to fake. Also, it may inadvertently prove some of the factual statements false or true. <that’s usually how I type people, because information even as such that I provide to myself and others is always subjective.

Holy social akwardice. Not a fat chance in hell, can I say something without making it seem like a computer with an unnecessary extra keyboard. I must think before I say something, but I can't!

--- Sounds like Ne, or maybe just lack of mental discipline

I’ll rephrase the bolded:
When in the middle of any given social interaction, my mind goes on autopilot and my logical thought gives way. It’s not that I have a form of turrets syndrome; I always pegged it on introversion.

which your whole post shows

And THAT, is what my problem is. I don’t think that I am intuitive. (Subjectivity? Definitely.) The problem doesn’t lie in the fact that I am or am not intuitive, rather more so in the blurred division I have, or seem to have, which affects my decision. I’m not just blindly going to follow what a certain test says without checking.

-- This is actually fairly typical of INTPs (also Enneagram 5) - being scared they'll end up spent, and trying to be prepared or at least know what they're getting into so their use of energy is economical, efficient and doesn't leave them dry. Being cautious doesn't make you an SJ.

I always thought it to be an SJ trait, or enneagram 6. I suppose it could be both(enneagram 5 and 6). You either play it safe to conserve energy, or for stability. The type of stability as in the show, Lost, could one push the button every hundred and some minutes for the rest of one’s life. I identify with the former.

Based on this I'd guess xNTP, though an NJ is also a possibility. But that analysis could change with more data.

Hiya, welcome.
For what a first impression is worth..
You sound like a Perception dominant. If I were to narrow it down further I'd say an N dominant. Further still, probably an Ne dominant. And further than that I can't say..

Possible types: ENTP, ESTP, ENFP, INFJ

Thanks!
Your input is appreciated, but may I ask what made you think extroversion(just curious)?

 

[Lith]

warning- I’m aware that I will not fit one type exactly as shoes to a shoebox, but I’m more so looking for a certain general idea.

I typed myself ISTP for a few reasons:
-I don’t see the big picture for all aspects.
-I hunger after knowing how something works, whether theoretically or practically.
-Even though I like theory, I like putting things to practice (though it’s not necessary)
-I see a gloomy future when under stress(classic ISTP)
-I fall in between the ground and the clouds, not quite at either. INTP’s, in my opinion, have cotton candy for clouds and therefore are able to sit up there for longer that an ISTP/INTJ whose helium balloon can only stay up for so long, but doesn’t too often hit the ground and remain there unmoving.

Just some extra information:
-I like patterns
-Things with plots, I predict
-I find Philosophy very interesting
-history is one of my weakest areas
-science is one of my strongest areas

Reasoning by other means:
When you look at a certain type as a body instead of 4 dichotomies, you will notice that each type when combined, changes the stereotype of another definite component. So, in an ISTP, the P and the S are as if neighboring opposites, but not quite exactly opposite and when united, they dilute each other and so makes the ISTP seem like an INTJ and vice versa. Now, this is all confirmed by the similar function arrangement between ISTPs and INTJs. That said, there are still differences that lie between the two types depending on one’s stronger preference. This theory checks out when you look at the similarities in arrangement among the cognitive functions. This explains why I always test INTj. (low J preference)
Another reason would include a rough creativity scale I thought up(the right side being most off beat and individualistic left being least):

XSTJ, XSFJ, XSTP, XSFP, XNTJ, XNFJ, XNTP, XNFP

It’s extremely general and diluted, but it’s an idea.

Also, if you look at type similarities It would look like this:

XSTJ, XSFJ, XSTP/XNTJ, XSFP/XNFJ, XNTP, XNFP
(first two and last two acting as extremes)

I would place myself straight in the middle and since and INTJ is a similar type to ISTP, ISTP it is.

 

[Auburn]

Thanks!
Your input is appreciated, but may I ask what made you think extroversion(just curious)?

Hi,
I made a long reply to you before realizing it was crap.. ^^;

Um, I really dunno what type you might be. Your first post appeared quite visceral and overall more fluid in the stream-of-consciousness way that perception doms do, in sentences such as this:

..seldom do I have real, nitty-gritty concious thought.. it's hard to explain. My thinking is like an effortless flow from a water tap, not much pressure and not just a drip, in contrast to pure concious thought that is like pumping for water and can be related to speaking

In contrast to the principle-focused way judgment dominants operate. ISTPs are Ti dominants meaning they're primarily concerned with making accurate distinctions between things -- deconstructing shades of gray into their fundamental pixel forms to see what it really is.

They like to base their positions on conscious and premeditated logic, and move about reality in accordance to those truth principles they establish - polishing up their categorization endlessly as they encounter new situations - without tiring.

 

[Dapper Dan]

Wait, so why do you think you're Se?

 

[Felan]

To me, personality typing is a tool not an identity.

You seem to process with mostly like INTx, with a stronger J than P, in my opinion. I personally don't see a strong case for the functions stuff of MBTI, it never made sense to me (but I might be too dense to get it). The types themselves, to me, don't describe who you are rather describe how you process stuff. I guess I lean more toward Kiersey's view than Meyers-Briggs.

In any case I think the best thing that typing does is make you aware of differing viewpoints, how better to communicate to those different types, and how to be more aware of how/why you process something the way you do.

 

[Lith]

Hi,
I made a long reply to you before realizing it was crap.. ^^;

Um, I really dunno what type you might be. Your first post appeared quite visceral and overall more fluid in the stream-of-consciousness way that perception doms do, in sentences such as this:

In contrast to the principle-focused way judgment dominants operate. ISTPs are Ti dominants meaning they're primarily concerned with making accurate distinctions between things -- deconstructing shades of gray into their fundamental pixel forms to see what it really is.

They like to base their positions on conscious and premeditated logic, and move about reality in accordance to those truth principles they establish - polishing up their categorization endlessly as they encounter new situations - without tiring.

Hm, well, two things are constant now, the Introversion and the Thinking.

Wait, so why do you think you're Se?

Se is quite a low performing function for me, tertiary at best. Now, you're probably going to ask why I would think to be an ISTP. Relative to myself, I don't seem like an INTP or an INTJ. I stated most of the reasons in my last post. I used a sundry of means to type myself and by my own subjective means I gather to be an ISTP. I'd say that I am basically an average somewhere between ISTP, INTJ, and INTP. Typing myself is very subjective to the way I see myself, there are too many things that I may be ignorant of that should factor in. Which is why I encouraged to be typed, not by the facts I provided, but instead how I delivered the facts.

To me, personality typing is a tool not an identity.

In any case I think the best thing that typing does is make you aware of differing viewpoints, how better to communicate to those different types, and how to be more aware of how/why you process something the way you do.

I agree with this, but if I've started trying to type myself, I may as well finish.
I consider myself to be just another personality that needs typing. I will not make any amendments to my personality, due to the MBTI, that would just seem.. Goofy.

You seem to process with mostly like INTx, with a stronger J than P, in my opinion. I personally don't see a strong case for the functions stuff of MBTI, it never made sense to me (but I might be too dense to get it). The types themselves, to me, don't describe who you are rather describe how you process stuff. I guess I lean more toward Kiersey's view than Meyers-Briggs.

Kiersey temperment sorter and the MBTI are essentially the same. Though Kiersey's sort of orbits N/S and is slightly more diluted than the MBTI.

aside from the N factor, that fits. I still can't see N. What if you were to type me by just the way I wrote my sentences and the words I chose to fill my writing with, instead of even considering the facts I've already given out? would your opinion have differed?

 

[Dapper Dan]

Se is quite a low performing function for me, tertiary at best. Now, you're probably going to ask why I would think to be an ISTP. Relative to myself, I don't seem like an INTP or an INTJ. I stated most of the reasons in my last post. I used a sundry of means to type myself and by my own subjective means I gather to be an ISTP. I'd say that I am basically an average somewhere between ISTP, INTJ, and INTP. Typing myself is very subjective to the way I see myself, there are too many things that I may be ignorant of that should factor in. Which is why I encouraged to be typed, not by the facts I provided, but instead how I delivered the facts.

Ok... I guess I follow you. It seems to me that your real personality type is probably buried under a bunch of external modifications. If you want to know your natural-born type, then try to filter out the behaviors that you had to learn, or that you are forced to emphasize day-to-day. What would your behavior be if you had no obligations or responsibilities to force you in any one direction?

I will not make any amendments to my personality, due to the MBTI, that would just seem.. Goofy.

Actually, that's kind of the point. A personality type isn't an identity for you to cling to, it's a tool to help you better yourself. Refusing to change is the same as refusing to better yourself.

 

[Lith]

Ok... I guess I follow you. It seems to me that your real personality type is probably buried under a bunch of external modifications. If you want to know your natural-born type, then try to filter out the behaviors that you had to learn, or that you are forced to emphasize day-to-day. What would your behavior be if you had no obligations or responsibilities to force you in any one direction?

Hm, That's a good point you have. Just out of curiosity, what gave you the idea about external modifications from my posts? If something caused this idea that originated from my posts, then perhaps you have a different idea of what my type is?

In that case, my introversion would exceed normal limits and I would become reclusive, my crave for knowledge and understanding would remain, I would probably be more of a perceiver. I can't say much as far as N would go, but my second point could be an indicator towards intuition.
Keep in mind that I have changed myself to be the way I am(everyone modifies themselves if there is something they do not like). I make amendments quite often; why would I want to function with flaws rather than without?

ALSO: even with external forces pushing in a certain direction, I would say that it would be quite hard to mould writing styles or ideas, unless it was this way from an early age.

Actually, that's kind of the point. A personality type isn't an identity for you to cling to, it's a tool to help you better yourself. Refusing to change is the same as refusing to better yourself.

I agree with this, and I make changes to the way I am, but not souly due to the MBTI. Yes it helps to understand yourself, but I dont think its enough to base changes on.

 

[Dapper Dan]

Hm, That's a good point you have. Just out of curiosity, what gave you the idea about external modifications from my posts? If something caused this idea that originated from my posts, then perhaps you have a different idea of what my type is?

"I can't pull myself down to earth(sometimes it's the opposite), it's almost like I have a large white cone around my neck, simultaneously blocking my view and blinding me. I daydream an awful lot, it's just the oddest compilation of thoughts, and I'm getting to think I just think that way because seldom do I have real, nitty-gritty concious thought.. it's hard to explain. My thinking is like an effortless flow from a water tap, not much pressure and not just a drip, in contrast to pure concious thought that is like pumping for water and can be related to speaking; consciously speaking out loud, but in your head. Many times, I will just spew something out of my mouth that seems almost alien.. just the oddest of thoughts. It's been said that I have an odd way of speaking, not accent wise, but colourful diction; making odd analogies, adjectives, structure."

This paragraph is almost entirely made up of Ne behavior. Daydreaming and being unaware of your surroundings are especially contradictory to Se, which is supposed to be very attentive and in-the-moment.

Despite this, you see yourself as Se. The two cannot (theoretically) coexist, so one must have come from an external source. Either that, or you value Se highly enough to wish it upon yourself.

ALSO: even with external forces pushing in a certain direction, I would say that it would be quite hard to mould writing styles or ideas, unless it was this way from an early age.

I'm not so sure. Writing is something we are taught all through school, whereas verbal communication is mostly learned through immersion. That, combined with the possibility for revision makes me think that typing someone based on their writing is probably not going to be accurate.

We INTPs do tend to put a bit of effort into our posts, but not always. And other types can easily achieve a similar style by taking the time to revise.

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

how much of a crazy conspiracy theorist I am.

INFJ

 

[Lith]

Despite this, you see yourself as Se. The two cannot (theoretically) coexist, so one must have come from an external source. Either that, or you value Se highly enough to wish it upon yourself.

My view of any N is simply different from myself(subjectively speaking). I figured I had to be something else, but nothing fits.
I suppose INTp can do for now(though I'll probably probe until I find a new angle.)

Your help was appreciated :]

 

[Lith]

INFJ

Nope, T.
But, Why the F?

Speaking of conspiracy:

cat plots evil

(found it on a conspiracy forum)

 

[Artsu Tharaz]

My thinking is like an effortless flow from a water tap, not much pressure and not just a drip, in contrast to pure concious thought that is like pumping for water and can be related to speaking; consciously speaking out loud, but in your head.

On second thoughts...

(responses are converging on ENTP, it seems)

 

[Zionoxis]

May I point out that since we ARE on an INTP forum that it would reasonable to assume there may be a bias towards INTP's? Also, you seem to bias yourself toward INTP's anyhow. My second thought is that you typed as INTP since you are currently posting in this forum. I may be wrong and you could have posted on all type forums (though the likelyhood is low). My point being, you describe yourself as INTP. The major flaw in MBTI is not the theory of the functions themselves, but simply that the test is open to so many different biases and based on who you THINK you are (or feel in your case ). Look around and really introspect yourself. Sometimes we type as what we want to be, not what we are, and it can be difficult to see what we are. Think of the analogy with your face. You can only see your face through a mirror. When looking in a mirror, you can only see so much. Those around you see you every day.

Just a few things to take into consideration. I type as INTP and I tend to dismiss ALL ideas. Many people get angry because I simply do not agree with them on anything (I find fault in most things stated). But I suppose since INTP's are inbred with the ability to find flaws in ideas, it is possible for us to also develop the habit of dismissing ideas based on those found faults as well, I suppose.

 

[cheese]

You're N not because you see the big picture, but because you automatically conceptualise and work in abstract areas. This *doesn't mean* you don't like to get out there in the real world. It also doesn't mean you'll always see the big picture!. 'Seeing the big picture' - I don't like that phrase because it has value connotations. Being N doesn't mean you'll always be right in the areas you work in. It just means your mind tends to work in abstract areas. Now even that's a little iffy - it sounds way more out-there than it actually is.

For a long time I thought I couldn't possibly be N either because the N descriptions sounded insane and ridiculous, and I felt way too ploddy in some ways and too bound to earth to be anything but concrete, literal and S-y. (The descriptions on the internet... most of them are pretty bad imo.) What 'working in abstract areas' means is basically decontextualising. This is where most humour comes from. Ne's decontextualise by bringing in other contexts that their mind springs on when taking in data. That's where you get wacky humour from - instead of the brain being bound to this specific context as it is happening right now, it riffs off a bunch of bits of data bringing in a whole lot of other, irrelevant information that it'll try to tie to the present. That's just one example of how it works; it also helps deepen understanding by bringing in other contexts to bear on the current one (for instance, seeing a principle in this situation that also applies in another and trying to see further connections in order to better understand or even transform the present).

Of course simply using analogies and metaphor (decontextualising in language) doesn't mean you're definitely N... but it does make it a lot more likely. If your brain does that all the time (and again, that doesn't mean you're not occasionally monosyllabic or brain-dead), then you've probably got N as one of your top two functions. It's certainly run throughout what we've seen so far. S's will tend to describe things more literally.

So yeah, if we took out the facts you gave yourself, your writing would still indicate N to me. Include the facts and general style, and it sounds like NP, with probable Ti.

History and science being weak or strong areas - imo, that's really irrelevant. Again, Ns aren't *incapable* of being good with details. I'm not sure if it's even more likely. Although when they are good, generally it's because their mind works to tie it all together into a pattern.

You're hungry for information and patterns - that's N. Very likely Ne, too. (NFPs are often very hungry for knowledge.)

Seeing a gloomy future when stressed - that's just a matter of optimism and character development, not personality. Most people are like that.

Desperately wanting to know how things work - that sounds like Ti. Do you feel compelled to refine your understanding, to use the exact words needed to convey the precise meaning you want? When facing a problem, do you try to find the right leverage to fix the problem with minimal effort? (Troubleshooting, basically - is that a strong point and do you enjoy it?) Does your mind work efficiently in terms of getting to the crux of an issue immediately? (Whether or not you get it right.) These are all Ti.

I'm not sure what you meant by your type comparisons.

I hope this helps. I wrote it a while ago, thought it was rubbish (like Auburn) and left it, but it seems relevant to what you've just said.

Hm, try not to think of N as mysterious, or in some way 'better' than S. Perhaps statistically it's more likely to be better at seeing the big picture, but that doesn't mean you will be able to track every trend, recognise every pattern etc - nor does it mean you'll put all the pieces together in the right way. It's more your general style, how you use language, whether you tend to analyse things (and if so in what areas), whether you troubleshoot your logic (Ti) when making any kind of argument or value judgement, whether your mind tends to come up with multiple meanings/interpretations of one particular situation/word/gesture etc - basically decontextualisation. This creates a tendency towards figurative language, analogies, metaphor, wordplay, puns, parody, satire (both just large-scale analogy/metaphor), flights of absurd fancy (eg JD in Scrubs - doesn't have to be extreme like his), etc. Anything that separates from the present moment by generating tangentially related information not relevant to the current context, or generates multiple interpretations/meanings off one data point, or converges a ton of disparate data to recognise a truth/trend/future. If you do any of that semi-frequently, and/or if you appreciate and enjoy it in others, you're probably N.

There's more I could say but it's all messy and would probably just be more confusing. I haven't been able to properly order my thoughts recently.

Last point - S's probably wouldn't care all that much about what abstract box they belong to. It's not *real*. Not all Ns would care either, if they think the reasoning behind the abstract system is weak and unsupported by evidence. But the fact that you've gone so deeply into it suggests that you're probably N, not an S, and into exploring ideas.

 

[Felan]

Which is why I encouraged to be typed, not by the facts I provided, but instead how I delivered the facts.

I was trying to do just that.

I agree with this, but if I've started trying to type myself, I may as well finish.
I consider myself to be just another personality that needs typing. I will not make any amendments to my personality, due to the MBTI, that would just seem.. Goofy.

It would be goofy but seems surprisingly common, in my experience. It's not necessarily a conscious shift but people seem to become more stereotype of their type then they were before.

Kiersey temperment sorter and the MBTI are essentially the same. Though Kiersey's sort of orbits N/S and is slightly more diluted than the MBTI.

aside from the N factor, that fits. I still can't see N. What if you were to type me by just the way I wrote my sentences and the words I chose to fill my writing with, instead of even considering the facts I've already given out? would your opinion have differed?

This is what my thought process was when I said that, take from it what you will.

You definitely seem more T than F, in spite of using the word feel once (you transgressor you). Words and ideas seem to matter more to you then things, places, products, and actions, which suggests to me a preference for N over S. In fact you seem almost exclusively focused on ideas, using things only as a way of explaining the idea. You tend to find it hard to accept something (meant as a general guideline) that has a detail wrong or missing, which leans more J than P. You express what I take to be an inflation of doubt because of inconsistencies or consistencies, which gives you a bit of P.

P.S. I could be full of shit.

 

[Lith]

May I point out that since we ARE on an INTP forum that it would reasonable to assume there may be a bias towards INTP's? Also, you seem to bias yourself toward INTP's anyhow. My second thought is that you typed as INTP since you are currently posting in this forum. I may be wrong and you could have posted on all type forums (though the likelyhood is low). My point being, you describe yourself as INTP. The major flaw in MBTI is not the theory of the functions themselves, but simply that the test is open to so many different biases and based on who you THINK you are (or feel in your case ). Look around and really introspect yourself. Sometimes we type as what we want to be, not what we are, and it can be difficult to see what we are. Think of the analogy with your face. You can only see your face through a mirror. When looking in a mirror, you can only see so much. Those around you see you every day.

Just a few things to take into consideration. I type as INTP and I tend to dismiss ALL ideas. Many people get angry because I simply do not agree with them on anything (I find fault in most things stated). But I suppose since INTP's are inbred with the ability to find flaws in ideas, it is possible for us to also develop the habit of dismissing ideas based on those found faults as well, I suppose.

Introspection is unreliable because I run the risk of seeing what I would like to see(that’s not to say that I don’t try). I try to keep from submitting to my own biased thoughts and even though I still do, I partially dodge the effects by not putting too much leverage over my own opinion.

I understand the fact that MBTI is a generalization, but I didn’t think I fit even that.

You're N not because you see the big picture, but because you automatically conceptualise and work in abstract areas. This *doesn't mean* you don't like to get out there in the real world. It also doesn't mean you'll always see the big picture!. 'Seeing the big picture' - I don't like that phrase because it has value connotations. Being N doesn't mean you'll always be right in the areas you work in. It just means your mind tends to work in abstract areas. Now even that's a little iffy - it sounds way more out-there than it actually is.

For a long time I thought I couldn't possibly be N either because the N descriptions sounded insane and ridiculous, and I felt way too ploddy in some ways and too bound to earth to be anything but concrete, literal and S-y. (The descriptions on the internet... most of them are pretty bad imo.) What 'working in abstract areas' means is basically decontextualising. This is where most humour comes from. Ne's decontextualise by bringing in other contexts that their mind springs on when taking in data. That's where you get wacky humour from - instead of the brain being bound to this specific context as it is happening right now, it riffs off a bunch of bits of data bringing in a whole lot of other, irrelevant information that it'll try to tie to the present. That's just one example of how it works; it also helps deepen understanding by bringing in other contexts to bear on the current one (for instance, seeing a principle in this situation that also applies in another and trying to see further connections in order to better understand or even transform the present).

Of course simply using analogies and metaphor (decontextualising in language) doesn't mean you're definitely N... but it does make it a lot more likely. If your brain does that all the time (and again, that doesn't mean you're not occasionally monosyllabic or brain-dead), then you've probably got N as one of your top two functions. It's certainly run throughout what we've seen so far. S's will tend to describe things more literally.

So yeah, if we took out the facts you gave yourself, your writing would still indicate N to me. Include the facts and general style, and it sounds like NP, with probable Ti.

History and science being weak or strong areas - imo, that's really irrelevant. Again, Ns aren't *incapable* of being good with details. I'm not sure if it's even more likely. Although when they are good, generally it's because their mind works to tie it all together into a pattern.

You're hungry for information and patterns - that's N. Very likely Ne, too. (NFPs are often very hungry for knowledge.)

Seeing a gloomy future when stressed - that's just a matter of optimism and character development, not personality. Most people are like that.

Desperately wanting to know how things work - that sounds like Ti. Do you feel compelled to refine your understanding, to use the exact words needed to convey the precise meaning you want? When facing a problem, do you try to find the right leverage to fix the problem with minimal effort? (Troubleshooting, basically - is that a strong point and do you enjoy it?) Does your mind work efficiently in terms of getting to the crux of an issue immediately? (Whether or not you get it right.) These are all Ti.

I'm not sure what you meant by your type comparisons.

I hope this helps. I wrote it a while ago, thought it was rubbish (like Auburn) and left it, but it seems relevant to what you've just said.

Hm, try not to think of N as mysterious, or in some way 'better' than S. Perhaps statistically it's more likely to be better at seeing the big picture, but that doesn't mean you will be able to track every trend, recognise every pattern etc - nor does it mean you'll put all the pieces together in the right way. It's more your general style, how you use language, whether you tend to analyse things (and if so in what areas), whether you troubleshoot your logic (Ti) when making any kind of argument or value judgement, whether your mind tends to come up with multiple meanings/interpretations of one particular situation/word/gesture etc - basically decontextualisation. This creates a tendency towards figurative language, analogies, metaphor, wordplay, puns, parody, satire (both just large-scale analogy/metaphor), flights of absurd fancy (eg JD in Scrubs - doesn't have to be extreme like his), etc. Anything that separates from the present moment by generating tangentially related information not relevant to the current context, or generates multiple interpretations/meanings off one data point, or converges a ton of disparate data to recognise a truth/trend/future. If you do any of that semi-frequently, and/or if you appreciate and enjoy it in others, you're probably N.

There's more I could say but it's all messy and would probably just be more confusing. I haven't been able to properly order my thoughts recently.

Last point - S's probably wouldn't care all that much about what abstract box they belong to. It's not *real*. Not all Ns would care either, if they think the reasoning behind the abstract system is weak and unsupported by evidence. But the fact that you've gone so deeply into it suggests that you're probably N, not an S, and into exploring ideas.

I’m pretty sure you hit the nail on the head in your first two paragraphs. My stance on N is weary because it’s just so.. Mystically exaggerated. Though, it’s not only that, but I know a few Ns and I just can’t relate my traits to theirs. Naturally, it there won’t be a direct correlation, but because I can’t see their subjective side (a larger part), I can’t even begin. One was an ENFP. On the outside she was a sort of a melancholy enthusiast, who seemed quite confident (there was also a foreboding element of her personality, but that could have been just me). Then in conversation, I realized that she had blackly burnt confidence and thought of herself as boring. She clearly wasn’t boring, but her standards were very high. That’s the type of insight I was looking for.


If Ne is decontextualization, then in similar terms, how would you describe Ni?

The type comparison was basically just a continuum that was formed by the effects of each component of one’s type on the other components, which also draw a parallel between the cognitive functions and the MBTI itself. It can be compared to the thermodynamic property of entropy.

I definitely have Ti.

I have one more thing to add to the mix which I just recently became fully conscious of. A few times a week I may get odd feelings that flip my thoughts 360 degrees for just a moment. I’m not even sure what they are trying to convey (it feels like a “what are you REALLY doing,” not as to question my motives, but perhaps enlightening me of.. something), and the true vivid don’t come at will. I ran it by the possibility of Ni, but they really don’t sound like an Ni bell ringing.

I was trying to do just that.
It would be goofy but seems surprisingly common, in my experience. It's not necessarily a conscious shift but people seem to become more stereotype of their type then they were before.
This is what my thought process was when I said that, take from it what you will.
You definitely seem more T than F, in spite of using the word feel once (you transgressor you). Words and ideas seem to matter more to you then things, places, products, and actions, which suggests to me a preference for N over S. In fact you seem almost exclusively focused on ideas, using things only as a way of explaining the idea. You tend to find it hard to accept something (meant as a general guideline) that has a detail wrong or missing, which leans more J than P. You express what I take to be an inflation of doubt because of inconsistencies or consistencies, which gives you a bit of P.

P.S. I could be full of shit.

It’s funny, but it's completely true. I feel(:]) as though my pre-existing traits have been morphed and exaggerated after I learned of the MBTI.
If you read the first paragraph that cheese wrote quoted in my response, it gives accurate reasoning as to why I debunk my “N” as S. The N description is embossed in a way that creates a façade of great omniscience that becomes hard to identify with for some.


EDIT: Forgive the delay, I had trouble formulating the reply, so I sat on it for a while