Beginners crash course to self typing

[QuickTwist]

First off I want to point out that this was a labor of love toward MBTI theory and the people who are interested in it. I know I don't give back as much as I should and this is my way contributing to those who are unsure of their type. I do this not because I feel some sort of duty to do so, but because I love to problem solve with numbers and this gave me something to work on for the night. I thought I would use my skills to try and bring closure to those who are up in the air about their type or don't know much about MBTI theory. While it may not be a perfect system, it is what it is and it has its uses. To tell the truth I didn't really think about the idea all that much before I decided I would stat this mini project. Perhaps it is a sign to come of what I will be occupied with in the future or maybe not. Special thanks go out to all those who have helped me better understand MBTI theory and its application; especially Architect who has a superb grasp of these concepts. I am open to constructive criticism and will try to answer any question I can on how I came up with this theory. This theory is just that, a theory. there may be some errors with the math in how precise it is but that is just something I will have to live with if I am proven that my theory is inaccurate. Anyways here it is:

This theory explains how to type yourself by simple means of knowing a little about yourself and following some step by step instructions. Its not all that difficult it just takes some time.


Read through the whole method in entirety before stating and revisit steps accordingly


1.) First you may look up the definitions of each cognitive function to get an understanding of what they mean (http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/).

2.) Then you, knowing yourself, can try to put them in order in terms of how strongly you feel you can identify with them. Make a list of all 8 and rate them from 1-8 in order of how strongly you identify with each (1 being the strongest and 8 being the weakest). This is the strengths list.

3.) After you do this, look up the cognitive functions of each type (http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/16Types/16Types.cfm [scroll to the bottom where they give the cognitive functions for the types]). This will be the type list.

4.) Match up the list of cognitive functions you made in the strengths list with the one that has the most cognitive functions in common in tandem with the type list in order from the strongest descending down to the fourth in order of the cognitive functions from the strengths list not associating with the extroverted or introverted identification*.

5. a.) If you do not have a pure type, which is common, get a calculator and divide the cognitive function's corresponding score of the strengths list related to where it is in the order that you identify the corresponding score of the number of the type list. If there is a conflict between the extroversion or introversion identification, take from the strongest of the score on the strengths list to match up with the type list disregarding the extroversion or introversion identification. If there is a further conflict of doubles regarding the cognitive functions disregarding extroversion or introversion, chose the next one lower that is of the higher strengths score that is of a different cognitive function disregarding the extroversion or introversion identification. (What you are looking to do is match up as many of the same cognitive functions in the strengths list to the most similar in the type list, judging the greater significance to the cognitive functions that have a smaller number associated with the 1-8 in the strengths list.)

5. b.) Divide the type lists cognitive function score by the strengths cognitive function score and multiply this number by the proceeding cognitive functions score from the strengths list one score lower in strength than the cognitive function you used that was divided. (If the product of the number is bigger than the score of the number from the corresponding strengths list, then don't change that cognitive function. If it is lower, replace that function with the one in the strengths list that you divided.)

5. c.) Repeat this process for all other cognitive functions in descending order if they don’t match up from after the first one that did not match with the strengths list to the fourth of the cognitive functions type list.


The distribution of points in the strengths list is as follows:
1=200 pts.
2=100 pts.
3=50 pts.
4=25 pts
5=12.5 pts.
6=6.25 pts.
7=3.13 pts.
8=1.56 pts.

*Note: If there is a conflict, pick the type list that more closely identifies with the highest strength(s) cognitive function regarding extroversion and introversion. There may be inaccuracies matching that would cause non-applicability to lower portions of the type list. Disregard these inaccuracies and try to get at least the first two cognitive function to match

 

[Anktark]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

Hmm, this method depends quite a bit on introspection, objectivity, clear understanding of functions and their differences (e.g. understanding the distinction between Ti and Te). Not to mention being able to tell how strong each function is expressed in oneself. I would have not identified myself as INTP using this method (at least at first): I would have doubted thinking was my primary and intuition secondary; quite probably would have identified myself as an introverted feeler too (because when I do express an emotion, it's not moderated/processed).

I am not saying this is a bad way to type people, it just requires a good understanding of this field or one has to be really objective. So it's unlikely that someone having so much knowledge of this field wouldn't have identified themselves by then. It ought to be good to check for mistyping or choosing between last 2-3 options though.

For an initial self typing MBTI test seems to be better- doesn't require prior knowledge or understanding of cognitive functions and might be a bit easier to stay objective while doing it too.

 

[Base groove]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

Make a list of all 8 and rate them from 1-8 in order of how strongly you identify with each (1 being the strongest and 8 being the weakest). This is the strengths list. After you do this, look up the cognitive functions of each type (http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/16Types/16Types.cfm [scroll to the bottom where they give the cognitive functions for the types]). This will be the type list. Match up the list of cognitive functions you made in the strengths list with the one that has the most cognitive functions in common in tandem with the type list in order from the strongest descending down to the fourth in order of the cognitive functions from the strengths list not associating with the extroverted or introverted identification. If there is a conflict, pick the type list that more closely identifies with the highest strength(s) cognitive function regarding extroversion and introversion. The distribution of points in the strengths list is as follows: 1=200 pts, 2=100 pts, 3=50 pts, 4=25 pts, 5=12.5 pts, 6=6.25 pts, 7=3.13 pts and 8=1.56 pts. If you do not have a pure type, which is common, get a calculator and divide the cognitive function's corresponding score of the type list related to where it is in the order that you identify the corresponding score of the number of the strength list. Take from the strongest of the score on the strengths list that has the same extroverted or introverted identification. If there is a conflict, chose the next one lower that is of the higher strengths score. Divide the type lists cognitive function score by the strengths cognitive function score and multiply this number by the proceeding cognitive functions score from the strengths list one score lower in strength than the cognitive function you used that was divided. If the product of the number is bigger than the score of the number from the corresponding strengths list, then don't change that cognitive function. If it is lower, replace that function with the one in the strengths list that you divided. Repeat this process for all other cognitive functions in descending order if they don’t match up from after the first one that did not match with the type list to the fourth of the cognitive functions type list.

This is your idea of an idiot's guide?

 

[Jennywocky]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

This is your idea of an idiot's guide?

It sounds more complicated than AD&D's THAC0/weapon speed system.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

Idiot's don't cba to read wall of texts. No one wants to read walls of texts which haven't been paragraphed.

I did so anyway though. There are several issues with this guide. It's apparently intended to simplify the process of finding one's type, yet it involves a strenous process of learning all 8 functions, and then running them through a calculation. That's not simple and doesn't constitute an idiot way of knowing ones type. I also wonder why anyone who knew the 8 functions would bother to do the calculus at all, what would they have to gain from it?

The main issue though, is that the functions are also susceptible to misinterpretation, knowing which ones fit you also requires self insight. Sure this method would yield more accurate results than people would get by just taking the test, but that's only because it involves learning about MBTI. It's really not much of a method at all.

The hard and simple truth is that if you want an accurate results then you need to learn the system properly, spend some time evaluating yourself carefully and honestly, and finally you need to get second opinions from people who know MBTI and are good typers.

 

[Pizzabeak]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

Thanks

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

I suppose the wall of text does make it seem a bit more complicated than it really is. I might ask the mods to give me the ability to modify the wall of text in the OP into a more user friendly process. I know this would be an exception to the rule but I feel this would greatly enhance the view ability of the OP. I suppose that if the method is overwhelmingly rejected by the members of the forum, there would be no point.

I think that perhaps the complexity that is felt for this process of self typing is a little misinterpreted. Perhaps, by the general consensus's opinion of the users who have commented so far thinking that these steps are too complicated can be summed up by these people wanting to understand the steps. After all they are INTPs for the majority and want to understand how it works.

Addressing what Cherry said, I think that there is a big chunk that is true in his interpretation. Yes, it may take some time but the results will be more accurate than a simple yes, no answer test and my method is less work than doing what Cherry suggests. Perhaps instead it should be called a crash course to self typing(?). While a misunderstanding of the definitions of the 8 functions might account for errors in this method of self typing, the same can be said for Cherrys method as well. I think, for the vast majority of people who come across this thread and use its method, will be adequately intelligent enough to use the step by step process to come up with an accurate self type. If anything, my method is no more subjective than any other method.

Anyways I have since tried to disprove my method and haven't been able to thus far-coming from strictly a math perspective.

@Mods, Would it be acceptable to give me the opportunity to revise the OP so as to satisfy the criticism of the majority opinion?

 

[Fukyo]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

You could send me a pm with the text and some sort of signifier where you want the breaks to be, or I could do it for you, but the first option would be faster.

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

Thank you, I appreciate that you are willing to work with me. It is my idea and so I feel it is only my responsibility to choose what and how the OP is edited. I will PM you with the new edited format so all you have to do is copy paste.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

QuickTwist. I would say you have described the process pretty well. Summarizing what I would do is to skim all 8 CF's. To determine type "all" one has to do is pick the top two CF's one is most at ease with. That is enough to determine your type.

Picking the top two is not that easy though. First one has to know the meaning of the functions as applied to you. Then one has to determine what one feels most at ease with. Both of these are subjective.

Pod'Lair claims it has an easy way to pick the top two ... by visual and auditory cues. I say it doesn't matter. While those sensual cues are direct to an observer they still have to be interpreted. Such sensual cues are not available or practical if one is not using the medium, such as a video recording.

Added: Another less subjective way to pick the top two CF's is to take a test. Unfortunately taking a test depends on one's transient state of mind and how one interprets the questions. Another issue is the non-objective nature of the test itself.

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

so...

Idiot's guide to self typing

or

Idiots' guide to self typing?

The thread is in the process of being edited.

QuickTwist. I would say you have described the process pretty well. Summarizing what I would do is to skim all 8 CF's. To determine type "all" one has to do is pick the top two CF's one is most at ease with. That is enough to determine your type.

Picking the top two is not that easy though. First one has to know the meaning of the functions as applied to you. Then one has to determine what one feels most at ease with. Both of these are subjective.

Pod'Lair claims it has an easy way to pick the top two ... by visual and auditory cues. I say it doesn't matter. While those sensual cues are direct to an observer they still have to be interpreted. Such sensual cues are not available or practical if one is not using the medium, such as a video recording.

Added: Another less subjective way to pick the top two CF's is to take a test. Unfortunately taking a test depends on one's transient state of mind and how one interprets the questions. Another issue is the non-objective nature of the test itself.

True. I thought I would error on the side of giving more information than was needed to produce a type rather than the opposite; when I come up with an idea I am usually extremely thorough. Did you go to the links I provided? Everything is included for coming up with their type.

 

[BigApplePi]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

I looked at the links you provided quickly. I am a minimalist which conceptually is meant only a guidance. Being thorough with details is the next step.

Hopefully minimalism keeps one on track but suffers from lack of definition.
Being detailed enables one to follow the steps to get there, however suffers from needing energy to avoid distractions and losing sight of the whole.

 

[QuickTwist]

Re: Idiots guide to self typing.

I looked at the links you provided quickly. I am a minimalist which conceptually is meant only a guidance. Being thorough with details is the next step.

Hopefully minimalism keeps one on track but suffers from lack of definition.
Being detailed enables one to follow the steps to get there, however suffers from needing energy to avoid distractions and losing sight of the whole.

Yes, I am an extreme minimalist as well. When I am learning about something specific, I usually just pick up enough info to make a conclusion and it is often stretched over multiple intervals of time. This is how I arrived at this method of typing oneself; by learning little bits of information here and there.

 

[QuickTwist]

A am interested in someone besides me testing out this theory. I would think the results would carry the most weight if someone who already knows their type to try this method out to test the validity of it. Any volunteers?

 

[Base groove]

I'll volunteer. Can you make it into a spreadsheet though?

 

[Cherry Cola]

It would be cool if you tested it on someone who barely knew anything about MBTI at all but whose type you yourself feel quite certain about :O

That is if you have that opportunity.

 

[TBerg]

When I first learned about MBTI and was trying to figure out my type, the back of my consciousness kept saying that being the same type as Einstein was just the best thing ever. I call this the manifestation of one of my Fi demons. After I learned more about the theory that offered explanation of some of the more unconscious parts of my psyche, then I started to realize how disconnected from the reality of other people I was. It was disturbing, for sure. The realization might have contributed to some of my sleepless nights.

This process was also minimalist for me, in that I focused more on understanding other people who were typed as Thinkers as well as focused on the specific issues they were having whose personality formations were similar to mine. I found that a good way to keep myself from going too far into self-deception was trying to figure out why the people who have problems with me might be right after all, and what might be the consistent areas of weakness within my part of the interaction.

I did not use to have the moderate diligence of learning psychoanalytic theory as well as understanding the cognitive functions as I do now have. Finding people on INTPf who had helpful insights as well as aspirations to actually learn this stuff was pretty cool.

 

[QuickTwist]

It would be cool if you tested it on someone who barely knew anything about MBTI at all but whose type you yourself feel quite certain about :O

That is if you have that opportunity.

That is where I am heading. I'm trying to do this in steps so as to not overstep my bounds of believing this theory is perfect the way it is. These things take time.