Typing yourself before learning about type.

[Mort Belfry]

A mistake?

When I first heard about type, before wishing to learn its intricacies, my ego screamed out to know where it fits first of all. I quickly saw similarity with myself and INTPs and then started learning about the functions.

But it continually occurs to me that if I had typed myself wrong originally, and as I used myself as a tool to understand my stronger functions, then what I've learnt about the functions would be wrong.

For argument's sake, say I was an INTJ but had self typed as an INTP. Then what I learnt to be Ti would in fact be Ni and what I learnt to be Ne would in fact be Te and what I would think was Ni and Te would just be a patchy undeifned mess.

Does anyone else worry about this? Did everyone else select their type easily and start from there, or did they learn about the functions first?

And if most people did select their type before learning about functions, then can we credibly be confidant in their understanding of them supposing the possibility they learned them wrong?

[sciski]

^ Yes!!

I originally typed as INFP, then learned about the functions after spending ages waxing lyrical about what being an INFP was like. After discovering the functions, I started defining whatever type of F I use as Fi, and whatever type of N I use (hell, it could be S for all I know) as Ne... then I read the many conflicting versions of what Fi, Fe, Ni and Ne are and decided I was probably ENFP or INFJ or INTP depending on what definition you used... and now I'm completely lost and sorta hoping I'm really an ISFP because damn, those guys are cool.

[JustDave]

Same here. I've thought I was an: ESFP, ENFP, INTJ and INFJ.

What helped me determine my type was seeing the full - all eight - list of functions for every type. When I read that Fi was the ISTPs weakest process it all became clear. Apparently Fi is, among other things the function responsible for self-knowledge, understanding, etc. And because I don't have a good grasp of who I truly am, it is difficult for me to type myself.

... but to answer the OP, nope. It's not that I don't worry, I simply don't care that much about the accuracy of my determination.

[Jeffster]

I'm completely lost and sorta hoping I'm really an ISFP because damn, those guys are cool.

You speak truth. :cool:

[Eric B]

I preliminarily arrived at my type through my comparisons of MBTI/Keirsey with the FIRO-based five temperament theory I was familiar with. I started by first trying to find parallel behaviors in the types. E/I seemed to fit what we called "expressed Inclusion". T/F and J/P both seemed to fit "wanted" or "responsive" behavior, but I wasn't sure exactly how, yet. And then, I didn't know how S/N would fit at all. Finding out about Berens' Interaction Styles helped a lot, as the final key was the third factor she added to the temperament model: structure vs. motive. This I then realized was wanted Control and Directing/Informing wanted Inclusion, and cooperative/pragmatic as expressed Control. I also determined that Keirsey had gotten Choleric and Phlegmatic backwards when he identified them as NF and NT.
I was then able to designate all 16 types as two-part Inclusion/Control "blends", and from there match one with my I/C combination, which turned out to be INTP. And it really did sound like me, especially on Paul James' page.
On the group I was discussing my findings in, people were discussing the functions a lot, and I was interested in them, and began learning them slowly, beginning with dom. and aux, and how they shaped factors like D/Inf. So when I suggested I was INTP, others suggested ENFP, because they way I was putting my theory together, they say, looked more like Te in a relief position. I did not yet understand tertiary or below. So I even went along with that for awhile. But then I began studying all the functions and archetypes, and I determined that Ti is really the "hero" and Te the backup (and often "oppositional").

Some of the problem was in understanding the difference between the introverted and extraverted attitudes of both T and F, as well as the difference between Fi "values" and Ti "principles". I too had readily assumed I related to the Fi concepts of "self", but when I took another look at both the cognitive processes test and the Step II subscales, I see I really didn't. And now I remember that whenever people asked me stuff like "who I was" or "what's important to me", it always went over my head. Fi is almost strictly a stress-related function.

[Mondo]

When I first became interested in Meyers Briggs a few months ago, I tested as an INTP.
Someone else told me, "No, lol, ur an INFP."
So, I was like, "Okay that fits."
I went a few months thinking I was an INFP. :headphne:
However, I learned a lot about cognitive functions and realized that T's did possess feelings. That was the reason why I was dismissing myself of being a T.
I also decided that the Ti/Fe combination worked a lot better than the Fi/Te combination.
I've been a proud NT since. :nice:
Ti/Ne or Ne/Ti?
I'm not sure yet.. I guess I could still be an ESFJ or something like that.

[Mondo]

Same here. I've thought I was an: ESFP, ENFP, INTJ and INFJ.

What helped me determine my type was seeing the full - all eight - list of functions for every type. When I read that Fi was the ISTPs weakest process it all became clear. Apparently Fi is, among other things the function responsible for self-knowledge, understanding, etc. And because I don't have a good grasp of who I truly am, it is difficult for me to type myself.

... but to answer the OP, nope. It's not that I don't worry, I simply don't care that much about the accuracy of my determination.

Just Dave, ah, so you're back at ISTP. From reading your posts, I think that's the type that fits you best. :yes:

[JustDave]

Thanks. :cheers:

[Jeffster]

Thanks. :cheers:

See, I told you we'd save you a seat on the SP train. I kept it warm by interchanging plates of tacos and hot beach babes in the spot until you came back. Now it's all yours! :nice:

[JustDave]

I'm definitely back on-board.

[Thursday]

I took the test first
tested as istj once, then INTJ like 20 times

[Uberfuhrer]

I think that it's best to type yourself before learning about type. And in fact, learning about type is ultimately completely unnecessary.

To extract any sort of use from such an instrument, you just need the four-letter code and the list of potentially fitting careers. And maybe a description of the observed characteristics of your type, such as the type descriptions at CAPT.

If you read anything else, you'll more likely than not just fall into a labyrinth of stereotypes. The kinds which spawn threads like this one (http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/what-s-my-type/6961-mistyped-mbtic-members.html).

There is no doubt that the theory behind MBTI typology is fascinating, but it's just so easy to spin something so vague into an infinite amount of differing interpretations. When practitioners and practitioner wannabes type other people, they are, more often than not, looking at one dimension of another person's personality traits -- usually the traits he or she wants to see.

[Thursday]

Ube.....i agree

[Eric B]

When I first became interested in Meyers Briggs a few months ago, I tested as an INTP.
Someone else told me, "No, lol, ur an INFP."
So, I was like, "Okay that fits."
I went a few months thinking I was an INFP. :headphne:
However, I learned a lot about cognitive functions and realized that T's did possess feelings. That was the reason why I was dismissing myself of being a T.
I also decided that the Ti/Fe combination worked a lot better than the Fi/Te combination.
I've been a proud NT since. :nice:
Ti/Ne or Ne/Ti?
I'm not sure yet.. I guess I could still be an ESFJ or something like that.
I noticew a lot of times (like now on the "mistyped" thread) people like to deny that someone is an NTP, and say they're asome type of F (esp. NFP) instead. Then, someone will say that F's like to try to make themselves T's, or whatever. But I wonder what makes people want to think of others as F instead of T.

[Mondo]

I noticew a lot of times (like now on the "mistyped" thread) people like to deny that someone is an NTP, and say they're asome type of F (esp. NFP) instead. Then, someone will say that F's like to try to make themselves T's, or whatever. But I wonder what makes people want to think of others as F instead of T.

In my case, it was because I seemed to value 'harmony' over 'efficiency' and that I seemed too damn nice to be a T.

Being 'nice' is something that comes naturally to me- I even won 'nicest guy' in my school.
I have a lot of empathy towards others but I am easily annoyed by stupidity and will make my decisions based off what's the most right-the choice that's the most logical. I will help people understand why my decision is the best but I won't change my mind simply because it makes person XYZ mad with me.

However, it's really only the XNTJ types (from my experience) who come off as jerks to others.
At times, I think it's logical to be considerate of others and to go out of my way to not start fights. I don't let much get to me.

[alicia91]

I agree with Uber.

If I had to start with the cognitive processes I don't think I would have gotten very far since I've determined that the three I use most frequently (and are my real strengths) are Ti, Se, and Ne. No such type.

When I read that Fi was the ISTPs weakest process it all became clear. Apparently Fi is, among other things the function responsible for self-knowledge, understanding, etc. And because I don't have a good grasp of who I truly am, it is difficult for me to type myself.

Well, that explains it all for me then. I have absolutely no self-awareness. But strangely enough, I'm very good at sizing up others.

[Ilah]

There is a misperception that is you are an F, you lack emotions or have very little emotions. It is not that Ts lack emotion - it is more that Ts aren't as good at expressing emotion. Sometimes this comes across as some one who is very unemotional and sometimes it comes across a someone with mood swings or emotional outbursts. Also common is the T who is very emotional insides but "keeps it under control" i.e. doesn't let it show. So a T who had problems controling emotions or was very emotional on the inside might think "I must be F because I am so emotional."

Another misperception is that Ts are cold hearted, don't care about others feelings, etc. I don't think this is true, but it often hard for Ts to pick up on what other people are feeling and repond apropriately to them. Also Ts are likely to give advice to people who ask for advice. And we get viewed negatively for it because it turns out what they really want is sympathy.

On the other hand Ts often portay Fs as illogical or irrational and few people would want to be described that way.

Ilah

[heart]

When I first took the test, when I first even learned about it was in the career counselor's office in college. I tested as INF and 50-50 in the J-P section.

The counselor tells me "This is a personality 'weakness' here for you. Well to fix it, just decide which you'd rather be J or P and just try to develop those traits more."

So I mean, who wouldn't think they wanted to be more organized and on time, etc. ;) And actually I never made it!

But then in the past couple of years I got into Jung through Gnostic reading and dream stuff and then into his personality stuff and I learn more about the actual functions and I see clearly that I cannot make myself INFJ and I am actually INFP because of the dominant Fi thing. I am so totally NOT Fe.

[Skyward]

This thread has helped clear a couple things up for me, especially Ilah, who clarified that Ts are just poor at controlling their emotions.

So would this mean Fs would be poor at controlling logical thought?

Though... To me I could be balanced on an F/T axis in that regard.

I -know- I must be an N. I have had a couple days where anything that happened I had a hunch that it would, or at least, a vague idea that -something- would happen. I seem to do best when my mind is on autopilot, then I find something that otherwise would have eluded me.

During a pre-calculus class I decided to ask a -lot- more questions so I could figure out the material.

If I dont learn -everything- about a certain concept, I wont learn it, or bias it, or I'll forget it quickly.

I first thought I was an INTP, then an INFP, then an INFJ. Though I might be a very reclusive E (Oxymoron?) for all I know.

I am sure my dominant function is N (But Ni or Ne, I do not know).

I have an almost religious opinion on music. Some people get red-hot angry over religion or politics debates? Music debates are where I get zealous.

I know I;m a good writer. When it deals with the nuts and bolts of english grammar I'm proficient, but when dealing with plot of a fiction or the layout of a non-fiction I struggle. Except in fleshing out the details. In all things I am the best at the details and the 'middle ground' of a project. It is hard for me to start and it is hard for me to decide when something is finished (Especially with artistic pursuits, of which I am very fond)

I cant stand 'dry' environments too long. I like to have something interesting to keep things from being totally boring, yet, I do not appreciate art with a lot of chaos. I also love work with strong skill put into it, such as Salvador Dali's surreal realism in painting.

I cannot just stick with the idea thats in my mind. It -will- change at some level at some point. When I draw things can change and I think up new ideas.

I can ramble, too! :D

Anyone know of any good websites for descriptions of the various functions? I'm pretty sure they will help.

EDIT: From looking at INTJ Profile (http://typelogic.com/intj.html) I think I could very much be an INTJ. I do find myself asking 'does it work?' all the time. I'll keep reading and see what I come up with.

MBTI is so interesting!

[disregard]

I was only successful at typing myself correctly once I learned more about myself. You can know everything about type, but if you are blind to your own self, then it won't do you much good.