Which type is most likely to be interested or disinterested in MBTI?

[XXXX]

I would think some type of intuitive personality would be the most likely to be interested ... probably lead introverted intuitives and with a feeling function (commonly interested in theory and academia plus society and people) – INFJs probably?

I would think an extroverted sensing type (ESTP or ESFP) would be the most likely to be disinterested, as they would rather real time activities that engage their senses as opposed to working their way through theoretical material.

Also, what sensing type would be the most likely to be interested in MBTI? I would have thought a feeling type, but ISTP and ISTJ seem to be the most common sensors on other forums.

 

[onthewindowstand]

I would imagine thinking types would be the most interested. Thinkers do tend to be more introspective after all....

 

[KazeCraven]

N types, because it tends to explain why they don't see the world as others do. I think INFJs might be the most inclined to learn about every type in detail, beyond just what the theory predicts, though it wouldn't really stem from an interest in the theory itself if it was based on Fe.

Introverted feeling types (IxFP) are just as introspective, relatively speaking, and love MBTI in general. Heck, Carl Jung might have been an INTP or something, but Isabel Briggs Myers was reportedly an INFP. "Feeling" types do think, though it's not a logical thinking. Logic vs Values would be more accurate.

Most disinterested... different reasons for different groups. SJs are most likely to think everyone ought to behave a certain way anyway, and would reject the MBTI on principle, though this is just a subset of them. ESTP though would probably truly be more disinterested, saying it doesn't matter anyway and most likely not to care about others' minds anyway, though of course that's just a gross generalization (the worst kind).

In short, you could find a number of reasons for anyone to be interested in anything, though I would guess ISxP would be most likely since such people can be more introspective than most other sensing types?

 

[wadlez]

I do not think necessarily for N types as I know INTJ's hate MBTI, as they find it too limiting and encapsulating of people (probably also because it sums up what to expect from INTJ's too well). So iNtuition, which is for possibility's can find the theory of MBTI to be too limiting (for some types).
I agree that INFP's love MBTI and have found that they are the best at picking peoples types.
But basically I wouldn't conclude it as an N thing.
I think INTP's have the strongest inclination towards MBTI as there Thinking is first and foremost for them so are not put off by how they feel about it, but most importantly there is no immediate objective reward or goal in studying MBTI, it is just interesting. Thinking about things to build up theory's for a completely subjective purpose is what INTP's are all about.
After reading about MBTI they find it difficult to not think about it.

Carl Jung was definitely an INTP, he says so in his video interview (there was no MBTI back then but from his type theory which MBTI was built on)

 

[KazeCraven]

Okay, I should say that when looking at the different types, statistically speaking there is a significantly larger proportion of people who are N types that are interested in MBTI than are S types; so much so that one is more likely to find N-type forums rather than S-type forums despite there being a larger proportion of S-types in total.

 

[Ska]

I do not think necessarily for N types as I know INTJ's hate MBTI, as they find it too limiting and encapsulating of people (probably also because it sums up what to expect from INTJ's too well). So iNtuition, which is for possibility's can find the theory of MBTI to be too limiting (for some types).
I agree that INFP's love MBTI and have found that they are the best at picking peoples types.

I would avoid over-generalizing here, as I have both an INTJ and INFP friend and they are equally interested in the theory.

I'd say the biggest factor in whether or not you like MBTI would have to be N/S. While I guess S types could like the theory for it's practical use, I still believe they would have a hard time seeing that at first. Even my ENFP friend took a pretty good interest in it when I started talking to him about it, and even when I got into more of the theory behind it. I never brought it up to my ESTP friend (mostly because I knew he wouldn't understand), but I've tried talking theory with him before and his brain goes haywire and immediately shuts down (inferior Ni?) .

 

[cheese]

Yeah, I love that wall Sensors put up when you start going places they have no interest in following - it's so big and solid, it's almost comforting. You always know where you are with them, until they steal your kidneys, ???, profit!. Then you don't know where the hell either of you are. Let alone your organs. God, I hate Sensors.

 

[KazeCraven]

...I was following you until you got to kidneys. Now I'm wondering whether I actually something against S-types as you obviously do (whether it is justified could be a matter of debate).

 

[Ska]

...I was following you until you got to kidneys. Now I'm wondering whether I actually something against S-types as you obviously do (whether it is justified could be a matter of debate).

Let's debate

I don't have anything against S types, really, but I do find that I get along with N types much, much better than I do S types. Does that mean I hate S types? Of course not - they are the way they are in the same way that I am the way I am. It's not changeable. So I certainly cannot fault them for it or hold it against them, but if I had to choose between a friendship with an N type or a S type (knowing only that information), I would choose the N type every time for sure. So I wouldn't say a hatred against S types is justified, seeing as that would be very S of someone themselves, but I would say a slight bias towards N types rather than S types is justifiable if you're an N, much in the way an S could justify a bias towards other S types. It'd simply be because they get along/can interact better with that type.

 

[cheese]

Joke. I've got nothing against Sensors; they've got solidity and wisdom I aspire to. I hate typists. I was going to do a send-up of Feeler-haters/patronisers as well after seeing this:

"Feeling" types do think, though it's not a logical thinking.

but I wasn't interested enough in chewing.

Nothing against you; it just reminded me of countless of other posters praising their own analytical skills and pitying the poor widdle Feewers for not having a knife edge for a mind like they do. Piffle. Personality doesn't really relate to ability, in my experience. What you do with your life has nothing to do with what you can do with your head (too many "do's", sorry). I know Fs and Ss with great brains. An ENFJ in particular has amazingly good (speed and accuracy) analytical skills. He just uses them for evil. I also know idiot Ts. If anything, smart Fs often have the advantage over Ts because they move better in the.... oops, just realised how off-track this is

OP:
ISTPs, probably. Dominant Ti, tertiary N. Might be interested in analysing the system for a short time.

Maybe developed ISTJs? An attempt to gain hold of inferior Ne (even if they're unaware of terminology) might mean they make a greater attempt to try to understand those different to them. Perhaps. Could be a wild leap. ISTPs seem to like this stuff, at least online; maybe cos they often game and forum atmospheres can be fun.

 

[KazeCraven]

@Ska, unfortunately I can't disagree with you, as you chose a path that didn't imply a stigma against S's but rather a preference for N's. Kind of like saying "I like chocolate ice cream, but vanilla is cool too." rather than, well, a rather absurd position in this context.

@cheese: Okay, you caught me. I should have said "some feeling types do have a preference for a type of thinking, but it's not a preference for logical thinking". I.e. what is the INFP doing by himself when not interacting with anyone? I suppose you could say day dreaming, which (according to some people's logic) isn't thinking, but then I would argue that INTPs often talk about thinking "in images" which is, imho, quite difficult to tease apart from dreaming.

 

[cheese]

No problemo. Phrasing's a wily beast.

 

[Saoshyant]

Take it for what it is worth; I just took the highest amount of posts from each type from a popular MBTI forum. It'll give you a good idea at least. Of course it will not be completely accurate because some types have higher population than others. I am too lazy to prorate it.

NF > NT > SP > SJ
Introverted > Extraverted
Intuitive > Sensing
Feeling > Thinking

1. INFP
2. INFJ
3. ENFP
4. INTP
5. INTJ
6. ENTP
7. ENFJ
8. ISTJ
9. ISTP
10. ENTJ
11. ISFP
12. ESTP
13. ISFJ
14. ESTJ
15. ESFJ
16. ESFP

 

[Fukyo]

Just judging from the typological forums populace, the INXXs definitely outnumber everyone, with a couple of ENXPs here and there. EXXJs seem to be the rarest birds.

Personally I think STJs and STPs are the least likely to take an active interest in typology.

Si/Te is not likely to consider something if it's not proven to be efficient, readily applicative and backed up by substantial evidence, they might even be adverse to it from beginning without looking into it much if their worldview isn't open to it.

Se/Ti - Ti is interested in systems, but a system like this is out of the sphere of Se for the most part, it just wouldn't pique their interest to tinker with it, like it would for an Ne/Ti user.

*note that exceptions are certainly possible if the individual is apt at the use of their bottom functions.

There's actually an appropriate example of an ESTP on another forum who is a big advocate of the Keirsey's theory in opposition to cognitive functions. if you know this theory, you'll see easily how it appeals to his Se.

 

[echoplex]

I think that referring to the stated types of people on type forums is misleading. They could be mistyped, and internet forums in general tend to be heavily populated by introverts. Interest in theory /=/ interest in talking about it online.

I would say, in terms of sheer immediate interest, Ne dominants would lead the pack. However, I'd also say that this interest will often subside long before that of the Ni-dom and Ti-dom, and probably INFPs. In general I'd think that introverts have more at stake with determining their sense of identity, since merely experiencing/manipulating the world is not as crucial to their sense of self as it is for extroverts.

But then, I could also see introverts (esp. Si/Ni-doms) sort of taking their identity for granted and seeing no need to further understand it through any sort of system like MBTI (esp. one they didn't create). INTPs who haven't developed Ne very much might do this as well. Extroverts might feel more insecure and confused about 'who they are inside' are thus become more motivated to use anything they can to gain a sense of self that isn't dependent on the outside world.

So, ummm
Short-term interest:
Most: ENFP
Least: ISTJ

Long-term interest:
Most: INFP
Least: ESTP

 

[XXXX]

There's actually an appropriate example of an ESTP on another forum who is a big advocate of the Keirsey's theory in opposition to cognitive functions. if you know this theory, you'll see easily how it appeals to his Se.

Is that the guy on typology that types everyone that's perceived as 'cool badass' like Tyler Durden, Capt Kirk, Frank Abagnale Jr, Winston Churchill etc. automatically as an ESTP type confirmed and adopts them as part of his ESTP Hall of fame. That guy is so fucking annoying ! If he even is a 'badass promoter' ESTP then his Ti is weak.

Found the link to said thread: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/popular-culture-type/29416-estp-hall-fame.html

 

[Fukyo]

That guy is so fucking annoying !

Case in point:

Spoiler

Psychological type isn't about who you really are, just how you act.

 

[Indigo NT]

I think INTPs and INTJs because they suck with people so they try to understand them through MBTI theory instead of going out and talking to them