Detail-orientation.

[cygorx]

Intuition is centralized around looking at the big picture and understanding better from theoretical understanding. INTPs have a tertiary Si function right below their auxiliary Ne. However, I have a very high intuition level and yet a very high sensing level. Other personality assessments have deemed my type as 'exceptionally detail-oriented,' 'desiring concrete facts,' yet still stating traits of intuition like 'creative,' 'theoretical,' 'enjoys the abstract.'
What are your thoughts on this? I tend to see INTP's, INTJ's and INFJ's quite detailed.

 

[TimeAsylums]

I have a very high intuition level and yet a very high sensing level. Other personality assessments have deemed my type as 'exceptionally detail-oriented,' 'desiring concrete facts,' yet still stating traits of intuition like 'creative,' 'theoretical,' 'enjoys the abstract.'
What are your thoughts on this? I tend to see INTP's, INTJ's and INFJ's quite detailed.

INTPs detailed = Ti
INTJs detailed Ni-Te (imo not as detailed)
What I'm trying to say is that this is 'different' in the 'detailed' from S(ensing)

'Exceptionally detail-oriented' is a big generalization, rather exceptionally detail-oriented at what?
'Desiring concrete facts' pushes a little harder against N and for S, but still it's too general, the Ts still need concrete facts to properly analyze something, so...'Desiring concrete facts...of what?'

'creative,' ok we're out in space general, just no.

Theoretical, argues a little more strongly for N>S

Enjoys the Abstract, N>S

overall, these are waaaaaaayyy too general,

but imo the evidence points to N... plus, you haven't annoyed me yet (N)

the sig beneath your name is "over-analyzing"
not saying that S's don't over-analyze

but yes from all the 'evidence' or 'information'
and from the way you talk (internet persona, anyway)
I wouldn't be surprised or stray away from N, too little writing for me to determine NF or NT: but just 'casually' adding up: programmer, over-analyze, N, enjoys the abstract...sounds like NT (generalizing) (not terse enough for INTJ, so since your other options in your real signature, INTP deemed very likely.)


Oh, and welcome to the forum.

 

[cygorx]

I deduce that the classifications of personality assessments are primarily Forer effect. Because all people have an amount of every trait, and some are preferred, thus enabling that any traits apply to anyone. Your logic is flawed.
"Exceptionally detail-oriented" is somewhat subjective. Albeit, I kind of stated they applied to me directly, it is not in mind as a tactful description. In self-analysis, I would say that I desire factual clarity in everything. Obviously that is the nature of INTP; I close this by saying you're looking at a specific statement generally. The word "observant" is relevant. Observant in nature.
"Creative" is an inflated form of stating 'innovative.'
Yes, abstract ideas are clearly iNtuition, however why I like abstraction is because it boggles my head--my mind compels me to think over it, and I formulate theories about it until it all settles down to one singular key, and even that key is abstract, with the door nowhere to be found. (Alas, my figurative language really exonerates my Ne.)

By the by, I'm not wrestling with N versus S. That has been determined after months of introspection. Dominant Ti is a judging function, I have a tendency to switch between P and J. NF? Obviously not.

How quick you are to cold-read. Interesting, you are: You've made a solid attempt to 'read' me by an assumed persona without analyzing the smaller details.

 

[TimeAsylums]

Spoiler

I deduce that the classifications of personality assessments are primarily Forer effect. Because all people have an amount of every trait, and some are preferred, thus enabling that any traits apply to anyone. Your logic is flawed.
"Exceptionally detail-oriented" is somewhat subjective. Albeit, I kind of stated they applied to me directly, it is not in mind as a tactful description. In self-analysis, I would say that I desire factual clarity in everything. Obviously that is the nature of INTP; I close this by saying you're looking at a specific statement generally. The word "observant" is relevant. Observant in nature.
"Creative" is an inflated form of stating 'innovative.'
Yes, abstract ideas are clearly iNtuition, however why I like abstraction is because it boggles my head--my mind compels me to think over it, and I formulate theories about it until it all settles down to one singular key, and even that key is abstract, with the door nowhere to be found. (Alas, my figurative language really exonerates my Ne.)

By the by, I'm not wrestling with N versus S. That has been determined after months of introspection. Dominant Ti is a judging function, I have a tendency to switch between P and J. NF? Obviously not.

How quick you are to cold-read. Interesting, you are: You've made a solid attempt to 'read' me by an assumed persona without analyzing the smaller details.

If any of you onlookers care to notice, his tone overly changes from the first post to this one. Interesting. There is definitely a T somewhere in here, but there might be a case of F. N indeed. Hmm.

Bringing back the possibility, from this post, overall feel is NF.
INFJ very much a possibility.

sigh I guess I should (have to) say this as well:

I don't know if you misinterpreted my post as something else, or maybe just felt it was 'attacking' you or anything, but if it did come across that way, it wasn't meant to be. I was merely attempting to come to some sort of conclusion from the information you gave us, I wasn't criticizing you in anyway.

Spoiler

It's not even that I feel bad...
I just hate being misunderstood

 

[cygorx]

What kind of verdict are you trying to come to? I don't see how I've portrayed a feeling side. I'm not offended, nor do I think you're criticizing me, but rather: you're completely irrelevant. Now I am portraying emotion. I started a discussion about the relationship between details and INTPs, not about your whimsical cold reading.

 

[Hadoblado]

People on this forum often use type to infer further traits, it's very top-down and I often find myself at odds with the conclusions, but it can be very relevant. And yes, putting down your initial post and in any way mentioning yourself is an invitation to be typed by every member on the forum unless you explicitly state otherwise

I agree with you about the Forer effect, there is a lot of it going round. The existence of the Forer effect in typology classification is undisputable, what is in question is the degree.

I'd guess you as INTJ. From what I've seen they can be difficult to tell from sensors until you goad them into hitting their stride at a topic within which they are learned. The one I live with is immensely practical and has an eye for the details, but also very much enjoys abstract conversations and speculation when the opportunity arises.

Really I think being rounded in both details and abstraction is superior to an allegiance to either. Lucky you.

 

[TimeAsylums]

I deduce that the classifications of personality assessments are primarily Forer effect.

With 99% of "personality tests," I would not dispute this. However the MBTI isn't only another personality test, if it's background wasn't from Jung, it probably would be like the rest.

Should you still believe this is the forer effect two things
1: the classification of the 16 types, do have some similarities, but they're not generalities in the case of employing everyone. That is, yes of course everyone has similar traits, but the MBTI is pretty spectacular at breaking them down. If I went to every personality profile and it said "XXXX is smart, talented, athletic, ...you notice you're different from other people..., or some other bs like this" Yes I probably would be like, this is bullshit.
However, you can find interesting correlations with people's type and how they think/act, just sayin'.


but, 2: if you want to think you are correct, and that every single one of us (ok, just most of us) on this forum have succumbed to the forer effect, then we're all mad, and a little crazy because we're being fooled into believing something and you can laugh at us like people and religion (ya know, assuming one of those people, if not, then we're still all mad)

 

[cygorx]

The structure of Myers-Briggs isn't Forer effect. I would say, however, that the descriptions of each profile is 60% cushioned by Forer effects based on what they can infer from the profile alone. Myers-Briggs and DISC are by far the least "Forer" profiles. I, TimeAsylums, steadfast have no idea in what relevance you're in, but keep going if you're satisfied with your deductions.

I'd guess you as INTJ. From what I've seen they can be difficult to tell from sensors until you goad them into hitting their stride at a topic within which they are learned. The one I live with is immensely practical and has an eye for the details, but also very much enjoys abstract conversations and speculation when the opportunity arises.

Really I think being rounded in both details and abstraction is superior to an allegiance to either. Lucky you.

Are there any further evidence or manifestations or whatever of this type from the INTJ?

 

[TimeAsylums]

You've probably already seen this site, but as far as 'depth' in the profiles, I'd say (most) of us here go by:
www.personalityJunkie.com
Just in case you haven't seen it^

 

[Wolf18]

Intuition is centralized around looking at the big picture and understanding better from theoretical understanding. INTPs have a tertiary Si function right below their auxiliary Ne. However, I have a very high intuition level and yet a very high sensing level. Other personality assessments have deemed my type as 'exceptionally detail-oriented,' 'desiring concrete facts,' yet still stating traits of intuition like 'creative,' 'theoretical,' 'enjoys the abstract.'
What are your thoughts on this? I tend to see INTP's, INTJ's and INFJ's quite detailed.

I (INTP) agree. I am both detail-oriented and abstract. However, I find that "desiring concrete facts," for example, does not necessarily go hand-in-hand with "detail oriented." I see no reason, however, why "theoretical" and "detail-oriented" cannot go hand-in-hand. What if I like the details of theories? In conclusion, I do not think that "N" and "S" are mutually exclusive. Yes, I find that INTP, INTJ, and INFJ are often quite detail-oriented.

SW

 

[Hadoblado]

Are there any further evidence or manifestations or whatever of this type from the INTJ?

I'm sorry, I don't take your meaning. Could you please rephrase that?