What INxx type am I?

[Pegasus]

I know I'm probably the umpteenth person to post a thread like this, so I apologize. I'll try to make this as brief as possible, but I never manage to make anything brief, but maybe that'll actually be helpful this time.
Feel free to skim the walls of text.

As you could probably guess by the title of this thread, I am not sure if I am an INTP, INTJ, INFJ, or INFP. Yes, I've looked into the functions extensively, and it raised more questions than answers. I recognize that I use Ti precision, but I don't use too much in the way of Fe. Most of my conflicts with my (ISFJ) mother can be summed up as clashes with her Fe. When I talk with people, I can often hear Fi and Te in what I'm saying and thinking, but I usually get annoyed and clash with other people's Fi-Te displays. As for Ni-Se and Ne-Si, I have no clue as to which I use more. On one hand, I can bounce ideas off of others' and have the scatterbrained thought process of Ne. On the other, I internalize concepts like Ni, and relate deeply to many of the descriptions I've read.

The results of the many online tests I've taken have varied depending on the questions, and the only constant is the INxx part. I find it especially difficult to answer the feeling/thinking questions since they aren't necessarily on a binary spectrum. The most logical option is often to accommodate other's feelings, since the end result of most situations that would apply to the questions is to serve people. And the same applies to the reverse. Sometimes I act more caring and outwardly emotional than I feel naturally inclined to, since I know it is the logical (and just plain nice) thing to do both on an interpersonal and interpersonal level, but it doesn't usually feel fake at all. It seems like this is a Ti-Fe thing, but I'm not sure.

As for Ni vs Ne - I'm not sure if this makes sense in context or not, but how I usually go about things is by consciously and unconsciously gathering decision making material, both by reviewing my own thoughts and feelings on the matter and objective analysis, then I decide to take action (which seems spontaneous to other people usually) and often realize more while the ball is rolling, and the end result may end up coming more from the product of my brainstorming after I've started. A good example would be what led up to me joining this site - I first took the HumanMetrics MBTI four years ago (got INFJ), then decided to research more into the subject about a year and a half ago (got the exact same results on HumanMetrics, but not always INFJ on other sites). I was debating over the classic INFJ/INFP, did a lot of self-discovery, gained a lot of insight into people, and even made a thread like this over at PerC. Recently I had an epiphany of sorts that not only did my type not really matter, but people put way too much stock into their own types and convictions about the MBTI. Not like I hadn't had thoughts like that before, but they didn't really click. That being said, I'd still like to figure out my own type and see other people's take, so I came here.

If you're reading the end first, you can just skim the walls of text. Other info that might be important: I just turned 15, so I'm still developing my functions, I guess. I also came to the INTP forum specifically because I could relate to INTPs most. Again, that went on for far longer than I'd wanted to...

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

Oh please, we're INTPs, we eat walls of text for breakfast.

I'm not certain about anything but it seems we can narrow it down to INTP or INFJ, as it seems you have Fe but favor Ti in your inside outlook at your actions. But if you were INFJ it's possible you would be much more Feeling based. You haven't much explained where you land on the Ne-Si and Se-Ni axis. You said you don't know which one you use more, and I don't want to misinterpret that, but people do only use one. If you were INFJ, I would think you'd have an intimate relationship with Ni, which you're not speaking much of. When you say you internalize concepts, I don't know if that favors Ni like you say, but if you did use Ne that would mean Si was used too, of course, as opposed to Ni. I like to think of Si as specific, unified recall, but I don't know about Ni as much. I like to think of the Ne-Si axis as relating past data banks to current situations, and Se-Ni as taking in current data very specifically to form a large picture of something.

INFPs and INFJs have no functions in common. Although it sounds like you know functions pretty well so this is likely not news. What have you deduced about your inferior?

 

[Pegasus]

Hey, thanks for the reply!

As far as Ni-Se vs. Ne-Si, I really do not know. I've deeply related to descriptions of Ni that I felt accurately described my thought process. Especially the idea of observing specifics and coming to an immediate realization about something not entirely related. but that could be Ti. INFJs have Ni-Ti loops and INTPs have Ti-Si, both of which seem like me. At different times of course, and Ni-Ti more often.

If I were INFJ, my inferior function would be Se, which is somewhat like me. I don't have a close relationship with Se (or a volatile one under stress) like many INFJs describe. Under stress or pressure I tend to be very short with people and snap quickly, especially in reaction to incompetence. That sounds like it could be inferior Fe at work,although I'm usually pretty in touch with my and others' emotions, which doesn't seem like inferior feeling. If it's an internal struggle I'm facing, I'll mull over it for days, try to talk to someone about it once I reach a certain point, and stop when I've reached logical and emotional closure. Not sure if that's Ni-Ti, Ti-Si, or something else entirely.

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

What from the type descriptions of each type do you relate to?

 

[Pegasus]

INFJ - helping people, especially with understanding themselves, being NT-like without being an NT, dwelling on personal visions, love-hate relationship with humanity, ever growing understanding of things through Ni, understanding the other side but not feeling understood, being analytical but not outwardly so, and most of the general descriptions of the NF temperament.
INTP - can't deal with overly emotional people, logic being the apex of most of my arguments and thought processes, needing alone time to sit and think, starting projects and never finishing them, absent-minded but seeking a clarity of thought, seeing all possibilities and hypotheticals in everything, love of math and theory, rambling yet comprehensive way of explaining, and in general I seem to click with INTPs and their way of behaving.

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

The INFJ traits you described also described an INTP, but the INTP traits you described weren't very INFJ like. From what I've heard, INFJs are usually comforting others that are overly emotional, not avoiding them.

Evergrowing understanding of things may be Si too. But have you considered ISTP?

 

[Pegasus]

Oh, I do comfort them sometimes, as long as they aren't blowing up on my face or being too irrational. But often they annoy me even as I help them.

Yep, I have considered ISTP, because of the functions. But the SP description fits me about as well as the SJ one, which is to say, not very well at all. (NF temperament describes me best as far as being visionary and wanting harmony, but NT is also a good fit.)

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

Your comforting or lack thereof doesn't rule out anything by itself.

How much attention do you pay to the outside world? And in what way?

Also INFJs Ni is an insight giver, specifically to people, does that sound like you?

Can you automate tasks if you've done them long enough or space out?


Any other additional information that might be helpful to know?

 

[Alias]

Ooh, this is tough. I was going to suggest splitting into SP, SJ, NF, and Nt, but you already did. Maybe you're a really altruistic INTP?

In outward appearance, have people called you more blank-faced and indifferent, or more reserved yet emotional?

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

Why split it into SP and SJ instead of ST and SF? Is there some precedent I'm missing?

 

[Pegasus]

http://www.keirsey.com/difference.aspx

The precedent you're talking about would be the Keirsey temperaments. The link I gave does a good job of summing it up.

EDIT: didn't see the two above posts.

I space out when completing tasks, and often appear as if I'm away with the fairies, even if I'm not. I notice little details about people and my surroundings that other people think I'd miss because I'm terrible at practical tasks.

Insight giver does sound like me, although I often have difficulty communicating my insights verbally, especially if I'm not comfortable around the person.

And people don't call me either, but if I had to choose I'd say reserved and emotional. Others typically say I act like an outwardly emotional spazz, when I'm around a lot of people, but more emotional as in neurotic than feeling.

 

[Alias]

Yeah, I've done a lot of research into Keirsey. He's one of my favorite typologists, if that's what they're called. His concept of four temperaments is present in so many things (Harry Potter, The Wizard of Oz, and The Bible) that it's uncanny. I even have a copy of Please Understand Me II.

 

[Pegasus]

Yep, the temperaments are one of the most sound parts of typology, I think. Since they're painted with broader strokes than MBTI, they can be almost universally applied.

(Btw, I edited my last post in case you missed it)

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

....The link didn't explain why keirsey used NT and NF and then skipped ST and SF for SP and SJ. I'm still confused at that and the article doesn't explain why. It hints that SJ and SP are based on outward processing, but I still don't see the rationale.

I may be pulling info out of the magic hat, but expressing internal concepts concisely is often a J attribute, and the four INs are good at insights, the question is, what kind of insights?

Also to both of you, alias and pegasus, do you have any online sources I can read more in depth about kiersey? I know some basics but these temperament and architype references aren't so familiar to me. Or at least it seems like im missing something.

 

[Alias]

I'll have to think of more resources for Keirsey. All I can think of is a few comics depicting the actions of each temperament.

The reason Keirsey splits types that way is because he found more similarities between SJ and SJ than SF and SF, etc. For example, and ESFP shows more of a role as a Performer, someone who looks for pleasure and likes to show off. But an ESFJ is more settled down, performing his/her duties and exercising tradition, instead of searching for more things to have fun with. The J/P is more pronounced in Sensors than Intuitives, because on the MBTI tests out there, "scattered" as opposed to "detail-oriented" may mean N vs. S to some, but is intended to be J vs. P. An ENFJ (or other NJs, just an example) may put "scattered" instead of detail oriented due to an Intuitive ability to forget the minor details, but an ESTP (or other SPs) would know whether or not he/she is disorganized. I hope this strange ramble made sense.

 

[Sir Eus Lee]

It did, I gotcha. Thanks for the response. Approaching it from a behavioral perspective would make typing easier and more accurate in some ways. Ill have to do more research. And sorry for derailing, maybe we should rerail.

Perhaps an alternative methods would be to have different types you think you may be explain their function interaction.

 

[Pegasus]

Okay, I can't sleep so I'll try to type this out. I apologize in advance for any errors, since the last thing I tried to type at this hour was incomprehensible.

And this is all my perspective of how I use the functions interpreted through the lens of thinking of myself as each type, not necessarily what they are in reality.

INTP - Understand all aspects of a situation through Ne and apply precision through Ti, rethink past situations or ideas to fine tune them (Ti-Si), come to realizations through Ne and add them to the framework of what I already have (along the lines and another thing, but what if, have you considered, etc.), having enough random bits of surface knowledge (Ne) to accurately bs my way through most everything, but still be pretty accurate (Ti), relating some random thing or idea in the present to some other random idea or thing from the past (Ti + Ne + Si?), finding comfort and nostalgia in familiarity (Si), blowing up or snapping when I'm angry (inferior Fe...?), being overly precise with Ti but not being adverse to evolving other possibilities, just not /wrong/ ones, the classic rambling nerd with a big vocabulary and too many run on sentences trope and a horde of unfinished projects (Ti-Ne)

INFJ - knowing exactly what people think and expect of me and presenting myself accordingly to get the desired response (Ni + Fe and maybe Ti in there somewhere), being described as, and I quote, "emotoin wise and shit" (also Ni-Fe I guess) understanding someone's viewpoint based on my mental framework of them, perfectly working out and ideal in my head and focusing on it both as a dream and reality (Ni-Ti), being hyper aware of the world around me in some aspects and oblivious in others, but all in all being quickly overwhelmed by a slight disturbance (inferior Se), being personally attached with Fe but /impersonally/ so through Ni but at the same time, preferring a plan the majority of the time (Fe), staying out of conflict (or in some cases, deciding to get involved) because I get a bad vibe and see exactly the road a situation is heading down (Ni driven by Fe), getting antsy when other people around me are anxious (Fe and Se), NF drive for inner and outer peace, complete balance, harmony, etc. over NT drive for knowledge, understanding, truth, rationality (although both are very much present - but the NF ideals prevail as base motivation), classic psychic INFJ vibes and being thought of as an objective but not unfeeling counselor of sorts

 

[Sinny91]

I've got the 'Many faces of INF.j' open in another tab....
Not sure if it's clarified things for me or confused them further, you had a mooch?

 

[Brontosaurie]

noteworthy distinction:

something like ego function vs creative function

the dominant function is our ego: an invisible framework for our existence. it's hard to wrap your head around it. the typology model won't break you free from it.

the auxiliary is our creative: our self-perceived strength, our sense of agency. this is often what we consider ourself to be doing and bringing to the table.

if you are an ENTP for example (as in my own case which naturally i know or feel inclined to behave like i know stuff about), you may be tempted to identify as an INTP since according to yourself you are mostly Ti-ing, you're usually the one making the sense. but you fail to consider the totality of your existence, like chasing ones own tail, overlooking a much more severe pattern of never following through with projects, neglecting (or counter-productively obsessing over) personal health, postponing into utter absurdity, oscillating between maximal and minimal self-esteem etc (Ne-Si)... in this particular case, it's easy to confuse a failure to adhere to Si bureaucratic standards with a failure to be Fe likeable in person. it's a blues trap.

in the same way, ENFJ's often go "my powers of mystic insight are tremendous" while overlooking their obvious overarching preference of social and popular shit (Fe appeasing/agreement) over making any sense whatsoever (Ti coherence). and INFJ's often go "i am so good with people" while overlooking their problematic relationship with immediate reality. and here it's easy to confuse lacking Se attendance to immediate reality with lacking Ti plain-speak.

i don't know any of this is true.

maybe the aux is just a vain flight of fancy. i have a feeling the E/I opposing pairs annoy each other like none else. too bad type kind of isn't real. would've been fun to know. we should make a thread where we can complain freely about eachother so there's more data.

i wouldn't rule out the E types. typology I/E has little bearing on actual real-life observable extraversion, so there's no point in excluding a type because of that. especially the Ne-doms are extremely misunderstood due to a conflation of type with other connotations of the extraversion phenomenon. extraversion simply means outward-turning/reaching and one must specify what aspect it is that reaches out. in type, extraversion means that your standard mode of operation happens in deliberate relation to an object, as opposed to introverts who dissolve in tacit identification with objects, engaging their full mental capacities in one single thing and forgetting all external. so the introvert is overcome with some information and explores it entirely on its own premises while the extravert is just navigating between different informations. the extravert puts itself somewhere, the introvert absorbs. the extravert is a distinct entity, the introvert is simply what the world looks like to itself. it's nothing to do with how much you speak or how loud noise you can stand or how large parties you prefer. it's that type extraverts like to act, type introverts like to wait and see. but acting comes in many forms, and for Ne most actions are purely mental. waiting and seeing also comes in many forms, and may involve extensive socializing. Fi-doms might actually even be perceived as more extraverted people overall than Ne-doms. they're more likely to be normal and also to embrace their social needs. but they use social activity for their purpose: to wait and see, more specifically in Fi to desire/hope/something. meanwhile Ne-doms are constantly taking action making mental decisions by reexamining stuff, comparing disparate things in order to project a new dimension, aiming to think bold. that's not very social or extraverted in the ordinary sense.

to sum up my advice: consider the meaning of the auxiliary function and the possibility of E types. one additional note: typology is useless if it doesn't challenge your mind. go for esoteric, obscure sources. don't give any merit to the populistic incarnations. they are not science, they are not common sense, they cannot provide valid advice; they are just bullshit. they are made by people who preferred the easy path of repackaging basic tenets (we all know why MBTI "works" and why it's false) over the difficult but true path of always questioning.

 

[Pegasus]

I've got the 'Many faces of INF.j' open in another tab....
Not sure if it's clarified things for me or confused them further, you had a mooch?

Mooch...?

That was certainly insightful. I agree with your stance on I vs E in typology; however, I still think I'm an introvert. Not only am I introverted socially, but also in how I related to the world. Like you said, I'm the observer, I focus inward instead of seeking outward. I don't fancy myself good with Fe or even that good with Ne, so make what you will of that. I think it's true that extroverts want to believe they're adept at expressing their introverted functions and vice versa, and may overestimate themselves. But a lot of people, probably including me, value their strength in their dominant function too. Development also probably has something to do with it.

And I definitely agree about typology not being worth much if you can't challenge your mind, or learn something. You said it's not exactly real, but there isn't really such a thing as real or not real with an abstraction like this. There's no way to definitively prove or disprove it. Some parts will hold true and others won't depending on how you look at it. People will see truth that holds up no matter what through the lens of typology, even if it isn't the only way to see that truth, so it can't really be all unreal. Even popular, flimsy typology with all its misconceptions has its purpose. It's fun for people to see themselves in the descriptions and relate to others, and understand and appreciate their differences better. Although that for sure isn't where the meat of the personality theory is.

 

[Sinny91]

Ah, 'mooch' is just English slang for 'look' or 'rumage'.

I didn't respond yesterday because I can't remember which of my posts you were making reference to.

But anyhoo, I'm on a voyage of exploring INXX types myself, so pehaps we can explore together. I just finished reading: https://psyphics.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/infj-vs-intp/

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

I know I'm probably the umpteenth person to post a thread like this, so I apologize. I'll try to make this as brief as possible, but I never manage to make anything brief, but maybe that'll actually be helpful this time.
Feel free to skim the walls of text.

As you could probably guess by the title of this thread, I am not sure if I am an INTP, INTJ, INFJ, or INFP. Yes, I've looked into the functions extensively, and it raised more questions than answers. I recognize that I use Ti precision, but I don't use too much in the way of Fe. Most of my conflicts with my (ISFJ) mother can be summed up as clashes with her Fe. When I talk with people, I can often hear Fi and Te in what I'm saying and thinking, but I usually get annoyed and clash with other people's Fi-Te displays. As for Ni-Se and Ne-Si, I have no clue as to which I use more. On one hand, I can bounce ideas off of others' and have the scatterbrained thought process of Ne. On the other, I internalize concepts like Ni, and relate deeply to many of the descriptions I've read.

The results of the many online tests I've taken have varied depending on the questions, and the only constant is the INxx part. I find it especially difficult to answer the feeling/thinking questions since they aren't necessarily on a binary spectrum. The most logical option is often to accommodate other's feelings, since the end result of most situations that would apply to the questions is to serve people. And the same applies to the reverse. Sometimes I act more caring and outwardly emotional than I feel naturally inclined to, since I know it is the logical (and just plain nice) thing to do both on an interpersonal and interpersonal level, but it doesn't usually feel fake at all. It seems like this is a Ti-Fe thing, but I'm not sure.

As for Ni vs Ne - I'm not sure if this makes sense in context or not, but how I usually go about things is by consciously and unconsciously gathering decision making material, both by reviewing my own thoughts and feelings on the matter and objective analysis, then I decide to take action (which seems spontaneous to other people usually) and often realize more while the ball is rolling, and the end result may end up coming more from the product of my brainstorming after I've started. A good example would be what led up to me joining this site - I first took the HumanMetrics MBTI four years ago (got INFJ), then decided to research more into the subject about a year and a half ago (got the exact same results on HumanMetrics, but not always INFJ on other sites). I was debating over the classic INFJ/INFP, did a lot of self-discovery, gained a lot of insight into people, and even made a thread like this over at PerC. Recently I had an epiphany of sorts that not only did my type not really matter, but people put way too much stock into their own types and convictions about the MBTI. Not like I hadn't had thoughts like that before, but they didn't really click. That being said, I'd still like to figure out my own type and see other people's take, so I came here.

If you're reading the end first, you can just skim the walls of text. Other info that might be important: I just turned 15, so I'm still developing my functions, I guess. I also came to the INTP forum specifically because I could relate to INTPs most. Again, that went on for far longer than I'd wanted to...

My vote:
Not INTJ
Not INFJ
Not INFP
probably INTP

 

[Pegasus]

Ah, 'mooch' is just English slang for 'look' or 'rumage'.

I didn't respond yesterday because I can't remember which of my posts you were making reference to.

But anyhoo, I'm on a voyage of exploring INXX types myself, so pehaps we can explore together. I just finished reading: https://psyphics.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/infj-vs-intp/

Brilliant article. Trouble is, I related to descriptions of both types, even when the writer made it seem like a forced choice. Are you debating between mainly INFJ and INTP also?

 

[Sinny91]

I have the same issue with that article.

Previous to some of the members here saying otherwise, I thought, (and probably still do), think I'm an INTP. I discovered the test and took it prior to any contamination, just like everybody else here and turned up INTP.

I've taken MBTI test 5 times and scored INTP 4/5 times and INFP once. The time I got INFP I was rather stoned and slightly drunk, I just figured I was in an emotional state at the time.

The Jung description of INTP seems to describe all my motivations and habits perfectly.
http://similarminds.com/jung/intp.html
I also looked at the INFP Jung description and that fit rather well also apart from just a couple of the 'feely' aspects such as being prone to crying - but it only fits really well because it's like identical to the INTP description.

The members here recently chucked 'INFJ' my way, which had never registered on my radar before, so I had to go and check that out. The Jung description of the INFJ bears no resemblance to me except for the INTP commonalities.
http://similarminds.com/jung/infj.html

However the 'Many faces of the INFJ' descriptions really do resonate with me.
I added a comment on the thread asking why the 'Many Faces' author and Jung descriptions are so far apart.

I just know my best friend would read those 'Many Face's' descriptions and tell me I fit the bill. I.E Method Actor, Cobra, Gypsy, Guru, SP Wannabe, Revolutionary and Destroyer of worlds. I hate false Guru's and hope I never become one.

But isn't every type capable of being a manipulative & revolutionary?

The more I looked into the meanings of 'Thinking/Feeling' the more confused I got.
Apparently the Feelers are all about 'value's' but why on earth can you not be logical and have 'value's' ??

After a bit more reading, the concenus seems to be that you can have both, but 'one's more pronounced'. I'm just left thinking that the Feelers value's equate to the INTP's 'principles'.

I would never comprimise logic with emotion.
So from my perspective I'm still in the Thinker category, whether or not I have a lot of principles and value's. But having said that, logic can be applied in all sorts of ways to reach any desired outcome you seek, (bar, 'unchangeable' truths'), so it's all relative.

From the article I shared earlier the author mentioned INFJ's being percievers whilst INTP's are Judgers, I need to read up on that. I just sure as hell know I'm not INTJ, I'm to lazy for that shit.

As a side note, the only thing about INFJ that does resonate, Jung or not, is the Ni intuitiveness, I don't mind sifting through others peoples gibberish to make sense of it, albeit frustrating times. I just thought that made me extremely open minded and PPPPPPP for perceiver lol.

The thing that sounds most unlike me in terms of INFJ is the whole caring/mentoring thing. Come to me with a problem and I'll just tell you to get over it... But for some reason, people love that and bother me with their problems like alll the time.

Anyway, long ass post all about 'me' but I hope there's some useful elements you can draw from in there.

 

[Pegasus]

What I understand is that Feelers can be logical and usually are, but their /main priority/ is what is best for everyone, what resonates internally. You're right about having both but the distinction being made by which one is more pronounced.

About INFJs actually being Perceivers and INTPs being Judgers - INFJs' dominant function, Ni, is perceiving and INTPs' Ti is judging. But J/P is indicated by which function out of the top two is extroverted, so Fe in INFJs and Ne in INTPs. INFJs perceive first through Ni and then act through Fe, and the same principle applies to INTPs and every other introverted type. type. It's not that INFJs are actually INFP or anything, although in socionics the INFJ type is written as INFp, because of the reasons stated above, which can be confusing.

I think it's a safe bet that, going by what you wrote, you're probably an INTP with INFJ tendencies. The point of the Many Faces of the INFJ is to show how they tend to be diverse, and chameleon-like. It's not describing the basic nature of the INFJ, but some of the effects of that nature, if that makes any sense.

What made the members here suggest INFJ?

 

[Sinny91]

Thanks, that helps me understand a little better.

No one really cared to explain their reasoning, but I think a couple of people alluded to the fact it's my conspiracy mind-set, go figure haha.

You any nearer to finding your type?

 

[Pegasus]

You know, I never understood the stereotype that INFJs are conspiracy theorists. I'd think that be more of an xNTP thing. Tis a mystery.

Well I'm pretty sure I'm not an INTJ or an INFP, but I'm still stuck between the other two. INFJ makes more sense since I'd use tertiary Ti, the dominant function of an INTP, in addiction to Ni and all the other INFJ functions. And it would fit the bill for being an objective Feeler but still have the NF mindset of harmony. It makes sense, but the conviction of myself being INFJ seems...premature, or off, somehow. What do you think I am more like?

 

[Sinny91]

Based on the limited info I have... INTP.

You seem to have more than the basics covered in regards to typology, but you're still *here* seeking clarity just in case, and a few more reasons that I can't quite put into words at this hour.

Your Anime avatar is just the icing on the cake, IMO.

Welcome to the circus

 

[tommarkc]

My decision: INFP.

First, I would like to focus on some facts, that have nothing to do with BMTI itself:
1. You're 15 years old and you assume you have ISFJ mum. It's normal that you act like your parents during childhood, and in teens years you start making (you don't get it) your own personality, and in those years it's normal to start understanding youself a bit better (gosh, I always hated those words). So far you can't say "I'm sure I'm BMTI type (insert blank)". It will probably changing a bit. It depends on what you'll accept, act and who you will talk to. Also I hate those words, but you are in the age when you make your personality, while it's small chance people will change after their 50s to 80s- yet there's 30 years of time!
2. As you said, it's not black/ white. It's fair chance you wont 100% identify with a type you are. BMTI is an made-up approach. What you are asking is to find the type you most idetify to.

Also I must tell my brothers made BMTI, but only once and on an single page. And also, I have no response about what they think on description of their type. Only thing I know is they were given INFP and INFJ. And as you say, you're sure about IN**, which is good, because I'm stuggling with N/S overall (not your case only). Also, let my simplifiy and just say I was sure one of my brothers are T and not F. So the point here is, if you are F, it don't mean you don't think (which is loggical, because all F types will then not survive because stupidness... yet they do).

Hmm and here's my bad side of INTP. I figured out you're INFP, made final decision, now question isn't interesting for me anymore, and I basically forgot what I wanted to mention to explain because of my sub-consciousness. Yet, I'll try.

As I being only T around my brothers, I always got criticized for saying think that I think are true to people, instead of letting go. Sometimes it's about really unimportant things. What I want to say, if you're T, you'll probably have similar memories. But ofc, sometimes I hold back. Why? Well, in 90% its because I think of the result. I do it because of all the fuzz if I do it, not the emotions I'll make. To make a binary explanation of that, you see, it's better to have friend than enemy- that would be 100% thinker, I suppose. I rarely take things emotionally, and only for those I highly value. You see, big group of friends are assets, and a very few ones are those, when I get a bit more emotional.

J/P- I believe J's focus on the information they want to see. They see 1 single path and focus on it. P's get focused on all possibilities, which can be messy and completely disorganized. I believe you can see it in times when there's deep debates. One example that might help: you have a situation in which you must represent your complex opinion in 1 turn to a grumpy group. You have 2 options:
1. Represent lots of the things that support your results. If someone could write it all down, and then observe it all, they could check all of it and all options observed. Yet there's a decent chance it will be too much words, so most of them will give up before reading first sentence- the text is too long! (you're P)
2. Represent only the conclusions. Represent only the points that support a single result and abandon other settings that might look very important to the group. They will say you lack the detail! This is the best option, believe me! (you're J)

 

[Pegasus]

Based on the limited info I have... INTP.

You seem to have more than the basics covered in regards to typology, but you're still *here* seeking clarity just in case, and a few more reasons that I can't quite put into words at this hour.

Your Anime avatar is just the icing on the cake, IMO.

Welcome to the circus

That does seem to be the majority consensus. And heh, thanks!

Hmm, you're the first person here to suggest INFP, interesting. You say that personality solidifies in the teen years, but I think that's more of behavioral patterns. Basic personality is developed by the age of 4 or 5. (I don't mean to get into semantics here, but you get what I mean?) Of course people find their individuality in their teen years, and change their views, how they behave and express themselves, etc.. But the cognitive functions, the base of MBTI, are still the same. Which ones are used and developed and shown off, of course, will change. People may act like another type, but it doesn't mean they are that type. I actually found typology at 11, and began researching in-depth at 13. Many of my friends were perfect fits for a type and still are.

I relate to what you said about your experiences as a T type. Although like you, I knew when to hold back. Sometimes honesty is more important than avoiding conflict but sometimes it isn't. As for the J/P scenario, I'm definitely more to the P side on that one.