What am I Auburn?

[Ink]

@Auburn claimed to believe I was not an INTP. I am curious on what you base this off of and what type you think I am

 

[Hadoblado]

Are you calling him out in front of the tribunal for crimes against your identity?

 

[Ink]

yep pretty much

 

[Hadoblado]

Out of curiosity, would you be at all upset if you were convinced you were not INTP?

 

[Fukyo]

This thread is useless without videos!

 

[Hawkeye]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGH_1A-3bDg

 

[Ink]

Out of curiosity, would you be at all upset if you were convinced you were not INTP?

Since it would prove I did not understand the cognitive functions and myself I would be somewhat upset, otherwise no. I just see no other type I could be, I tested as INTJ when I was younger but it was becuase I wanted to appear more J-like, not because I was

 

[Hawkeye]

Since it would prove I did not understand the cognitive functions and myself I would be somewhat upset, otherwise no. I just see no other type I could be, I tested as INTJ when I was younger but it was becuase I wanted to appear more J-like, not because I was

Instead of taking a test, why not explore the individual categories and self evaluate?

Obviously your honesty will improve accuracy...

 

[Lyra]

This thread is useless without videos!

Avatar

Spoiler

Wouldn't say no.

 

[Absurdity]

You're waiting for someone else to tell you who or what you are?

Something's wrong here...

 

[Hawkeye]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH0nP4NzS9M

 

[Ink]

I am very certain the INTPs cognitive functions fit me the best, the intp.org profile is hauntingly accurate, no other types profile is even remotely close as good a fit, so no I personally don't doubt my type, I would just like to hear why Auburn didn't believe I was one

 

[Auburn]

This thread is useless without videos!

^
Yeah.

There's only so much I can tell from your writing style. It's an impression that's hard to put in words - you hit me as a Te user, from Te users I've known in the past.

# Little things like, post *drops*. You plop your posts.
You have an immediate (quick) opinion on a topic and you convey it briefly, hit submit then move on. They're usually blunt in that Te way. They don't bother with elaboration the vast majority of the time.

# Your Si/Ne shows in the style of ideas you have, and fixation on familiar/past concepts, while also having that silly directionless exploration into the new. But your Ne humor is that of quirky Ne+Te humor. Ne+Te humor is very unique, the way I've encountered it.

# It's the humor talk-show hosts have, typically. Your typing of so many talk-show hosts who are clearly Te-users, as 'INTPs' signals to me that you relate to them because you see yourself in them, and that'd be Te+Si. Especially apparent is the typing of Colbert as INTP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tnq4TJYN7A

Colbert is one loose-screw away from Te-lead Bill O'Reily. He's practically a toned-down version of him. Colbert is TeSi. A strongly Te and obvious one too.

# Your mode of relating to other members is also very Te-Fi. You're not overly affectionate like Fe-user Duxwing. You're not agressively Fe like own8ge/Lyra either. You're not using Fe to relate to the forum whatsoever, you have that Te coldness/bluntness and monotone/streamlined/staple way of treating interactions.

You're not "overly-Ti" either, if we take in the possibility of showing no Fe due to suppression. Your style is definitely not that meticulous and precise, but almost dismissive and 'offhandish'.

All this supports to me that you're either TeSi or SiTe. Fom those two I can't narrow it further via what I know of you. K. that's my opinion.

 

[Ink]

Your opinion is wrong

edit: I am sure what you're talking about can apply to some people, but it doesn't apply to me... You're a good typologist but not a good psychologist

 

[Hawkeye]

Congratulations...

 

[Absurdity]

You have an immediate (quick) opinion on a topic and you convey it briefly, hit submit then move on.

Your opinion is wrong

 

[Lyra]

Colbert TeSi

He's an adaptive goddamnit. You actually got tricked by him parodying O'Reilly and went ahead and typed him as the same thing, lol

 

[Ink]

^Adaptive as in perception-dominant? what type do you think he is?

 

[Lyra]

He's a NeTi.

Adaptive means your Te/Fe function is in third or fourth position, instead of first or second. Adaptive/directive is the most obvious visual cue.

Te/Fe are dynamics directing functions, so people with them in a momentum (first or second) position are called 'directive'. Te and Fe are energy fields concerned with the external, social or systemic environment and its direction, control, and manipulation.

Your read of TiNe (I think?) was actually very close, as adaptive/directive is the major dichotomy which is first learned in basic visual reading. TiNe vs. NeTi is more subtle shades.

 

[Lyra]

Oh wait, Cog. config is all a confirmation bias mind-game, I forgot

 

[Ink]

He's a NeTi.

Adaptive means your Te/Fe function is in third or fourth position, instead of first or second. Adaptive/directive is the most obvious visual cue.

Te/Fe are dynamics directing functions, so people with them in a momentum (first or second) position are called 'directive'. Te and Fe are energy fields concerned with the external, social or systemic environment and its direction, control, and manipulation.

Your read of TiNe (I think?) was actually very close, as adaptive/directive is the major dichotomy which is first learned in basic visual reading. TiNe vs. NeTi is more subtle shades.

Thank you, I will get back to watching som PL stuff soon I guess!

 

[Brontosaurie]

^
You have an immediate (quick) opinion on a topic and you convey it briefly, hit submit then move on. They're usually blunt in that Te way. They don't bother with elaboration the vast majority of the time.

Ti is concise. Te is appropriate.

go figure.

 

[nexion]

You really should have either taken this to visitor/private message with Auburn or not specifically asked for only Auburn's opinion.

 

[Ink]

^Just because I only mentioned him doesn't mean others can't answer, also are you really the one to tell me not to make unnecessary threads after your ones recently?

 

[Montresor]

Sorry Ink but I pay attention to a lot of things so you get to hear from me too.

First, I didn't think you intended to type Colbert as INTP but I only read it twice and never watched the video.

Second, I agree that your posts follow the structure and format outlined by Auburn already. His assessment of your post structure seems accurate.

Video typing really is all the craze though isn't it?

 

[Ink]

Second, I agree that your posts follow the structure and format outlined by Auburn already. His assessment of your post structure seems accurate.

Sure it does, but in no way does it determine I am not an INTP. Those of you who are saying I'm not just want to see me in a video, what's up with that?

 

[Hawkeye]

Sure it does, but in no way does it determine I am not an INTP. Those of you who are saying I'm not just want to see me in a video, what's up with that?

Could it be that text itself is rather difficult to analyse? It would be much easier to analyse a person face-to-face.

I'd argue that a video would provide more information regarding type than text. It won't give a concrete answer because a video can produce a false reading too - as we have seen in this thread.

 

[Ink]

Since I personally believe I am better at typing than most of you here and that I don't doubt my own type I just don't see a reason to make a video. I've also come to value anonymity.

 

[Fukyo]

> knows Auburn uses video reading method and furthermore considers it the most reliable method
> surprised and unwilling to provide video after publicly challenging Auburn and asking to be typed

Ok, so you apparently don't even care about his opinion. Why did you make a whole thread calling him out?

 

[Hawkeye]

I myself am not into typing people because I find once you know a person's type, you stereotype them.

But, for the hell of it, could I put your typing skills to the test and ask you to type me? ^^

 

[Ink]

You seem like an INTP but obviously I can't really know

 

[Ink]

> knows Auburn uses video reading method and furthermore considers it the most reliable method
> surprised and unwilling to provide video after publicly challenging Auburn and asking to be typed

Ok, so you apparently don't even care about his opinion. Why did you make a whole thread calling him out?

Because he said he didn't think I was, without any video

and boredom

 

[Hadoblado]

Since I personally believe I am better at typing than most of you here

Could you describe your reasons for thinking this? There are differences in opinion, but the chance that this is because you are correct and they are incorrect is equal to the inverse scenario. What do you know that the INTPf layman doesn't? Who do you consider your equal or better?

 

[Ink]

Could you describe your reasons for thinking this? There are differences in opinion, but the chance that this is because you are correct and they are incorrect is equal to the inverse scenario. What do you know that the INTPf layman doesn't? Who do you consider your equal or better?

Ok, saying that I'm better at typing than most may be a abit misleading, but many here don't even completely buy into the whole cognitive function theory, how are you supposed to type using that if you don't?

 

[Hadoblado]

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
~ Aristotle

Not that I think disbelievers will have equal knowledge or understanding to the believers on average, but I wouldn't rule out that there are people that understand how it works, are able to put it into practice, and also reject the notion that it is a valid model.

 

[Brontosaurie]

Ok, saying that I'm better at typing than most may be a abit misleading, but many here don't even completely buy into the whole cognitive function theory, how are you supposed to type using that if you don't?

you can type by other means than a narrow set of facial gestures.

 

[Ink]

you can type by other means than a narrow set of facial gestures.

I don't type by facial gestures (except subconsciously perhaps)

 

[Brontosaurie]

I don't type by facial gestures (except subconsciously perhaps)

that's what cognitivetypes theory is about so...

 

[hasen]

If you want him to type you according to his methods, you've got to have a video. You can send to him in a PM (post on youtube as unlisted, and remove it after 2 days) and tell him not to share the link.

For what it's worth I did just that and he typed me as ISFJ. (Needless to say I took that as evidence of the unreliability of his VR methods).

 

[Ink]

that's what cognitivetypes theory is about so...

I believe I said cognitive function theory

 

[Fukyo]

Auburn seems to be mistyping a lot of Si and Te...dominant Si in particular. I consider it an astronomical improbability that anyone on this forum is a Si dom, if there are any they must have run away from all the weirdness long ago or are fringe members at best - Si doms just don't care about this shit, nor personality typing.

 

[Auburn]

If it doesn't make sense why I type as such, I do respect that.
I've outlined my rationality for those desiring to see it.
But I won't pressure anyone to do so.


From the very top (it being a perception function)
to the very bottom/specifics, I've outlined the reasons why
it appears as it does. That's where the real debate should be, no?

I mean, it takes more than just surface criticism; of relating one's prior sense of what "Si" means to this, and just comparing and dismissing if they're not similar without considering that one's prior concept of Si may've been off.

But if understanding isn't the desire, then that's fine. No need to call me out like this though, about my methods, if there's no effort to understand them for what they're actually saying.

The objections I've been hearing are entirely result-based. Like when people reject a theory for it's final outcome rather than seeing the process of deduction that goes into it.

Please debate with me the actual methodology I'm using. Please don't just say "Oh well, the methodology resulted in a read of Si-dom, that just can't be right so it doesn't matter what the methodology is and I don't care or need to understand it because any methodology that produces that result is obviously wrong."

 

[Fukyo]

You're not above criticism Auburn, even when it's not on your terms and I don't appreciate your borderline passive aggressive condensing "I'm above you" tone.

I don't think my understanding of Si is wrong, even if it's "prior", and even tho I find it hard to articulate I think you're wrong. I consider visual reading to still be in experimentation at this point and do not care to deconstruct your methodology, it'd be meaningless in respect to my paradigm, which does not reference visual reading as the main "measuring stick".

Call me sloppy if you wish, but I'm out.

 

[Ink]

http://www.intpforum.com/showpost.php?p=324131&postcount=30

ok, visually read me by my eye

yellow sleepy eye thing obviously means i'm a perceiver

 

[Auburn]

can't read via just one eye pic....

Myawh, I regret falling for this again. ^^;
@Ink - Sorry but I'll no longer be replying to your posts, since they always drag me into fruitless discords! If you can please not ping me, when ur bored and need someone to debate with, that'd be greatly appreciated. o:

*is out*

 

[Montresor]

Wow I must say this thread got 45 replies and Ink is no closer to the truth? Fukyo and Auburn both checked out?

They were bickering with each other.

Ink, you told me that you think I am INTP. You can't be that good at typing.

Everybody says "video" and you say "no video". Then you're like - "why do you want to see a video so bad??" Is this Ink's typing thread or is this a bullshit game you're playing?

Seriously Fukyo made a really good point - I find that sort of rare so I would take it to heart. Maybe a little harsh in comparison (astronomical?? no.)

Particularly on the excessive use of Si in typing, though. In fact, Auburn saw some videos that I made and switched his opinion from Si to Se dominant. That oughta tell you something?

Lastly? I want to see a video because I want to see your face and hear your voice. So there.


Honestly though, I'm getting the vibe that you're making it out so you got "drug into this", which you didn't.

 

[Ink]

@Montresor, this thread is not as serious as you perceive it to be

 

[Montresor]

I can't help it. can't.

I dunno I haven't read it since I last posted and all I could see was a childish argument and no progress.

Funny thing tho, just as I posted, I thought to myself -- maybe this isn't all that serious and my post was overkill on the serious factor.



Edit:

this thread is not as serious as you perceive it to be

I just had a thought. This is pretty much Fe expression isn't it?

For me, it's more like, if I'm serious, then I'm serious. If I'm not, then I'm not. It's not a group thing.

 

[hasen]

The objections I've been hearing are entirely result-based. Like when people reject a theory for it's final outcome rather than seeing the process of deduction that goes into it.

Please debate with me the actual methodology I'm using. Please don't just say "Oh well, the methodology resulted in a read of Si-dom, that just can't be right so it doesn't matter what the methodology is and I don't care or need to understand it because any methodology that produces that result is obviously wrong."

What?

It doesn't matter how nice or consistent your theory is. If it doesn't produce the right results; it's *wrong*.

Of course you can argue that we can't prove that your results are wrong, and if that was really the case then your theory is simply not falsifiable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw

 

[Ink]

I just had a thought. This is pretty much Fe expression isn't it?

For me, it's more like, if I'm serious, then I'm serious. If I'm not, then I'm not. It's not a group thing.

It's Ti-Ne-Si-Fe-Te-Ni-Se-Fi expression