One more time...

[sassafrassquatch]

So I think I'm an INTJ.

The whole SJ thing is not working out for me. I keep reading that "SJs are thus-and-such" and I think "I'm not that way, gorram it!" So either everything everyone knows about SJs is wrong or I'm not an SJ. My dad is very much the model ISTJ and I am not my dad. The only other type I could be is INTJ. I read through some INTJ descriptions and the big one on INTJ central and they're pretty close. Nothing in them stands out to make me think "Well I'm definitely not that."

Just thought I'd throw that out. Feel free to object, comment or bake me cookies.

[Night]

I could see you as INTJ.

Smart guy; well-informed; seem genuinely interested in exploring the principles beyond immediate context.

Your gun control hypothesis (caliber as the determinant) is a great example of creative interpolation often found inside an N mindset.

INTJ is probably your best bet; as I mentioned earlier, I don't think you'd fit as an INTP.

[Uberfuhrer]

Smart guy; well-informed; seem genuinely interested in exploring the principles beyond immediate context.

Just remember that N =/= smart or a lack of curiosity. S and N are simply just curious about different things.

INTJs and ISTJs can seem similar on the outside, especially since they extrovert the same auxiliary function. So they are both control-oriented.

I see a lot of Te in Sass -- he's got a very macho wit -- so I don't doubt that he's at the very least an IxTJ.

But Sass, you're right in that you don't seem to have any typical SJ tendencies. Have you looked at the INTJ description at CAPT (http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/type-descriptions.htm)? (It is, of course, assuming that Ni and Te are working together.)

[Night]

Just remember that N =/= smart or a lack of curiosity. S and N are simply just curious about different things.



Why Uber - your implication is lewd.

My subtext is gracious, my lad.

[sassafrassquatch]

Just remember that N =/= smart or a lack of curiosity. S and N are simply just curious about different things.

INTJs and ISTJs can seem similar on the outside, especially since they extrovert the same auxiliary function. So they are both control-oriented.

I see a lot of Te in Sass -- he's got a very macho wit -- so I don't doubt that he's at the very least an IxTJ.

But Sass, you're right in that you don't seem to have any typical SJ tendencies. Have you looked at the INTJ description at CAPT (http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/type-descriptions.htm)? (It is, of course, assuming that Ni and Te are working together.)

That description also sounds fairly accurate. Another thing is that the things which the Guardians are supposedly guarding are those which I am most distrustful of. I place no value on tradition, groups make me nervous, duty and loyalty to institutions mean nothing to me. Being the salt of the earth, a pillar of the community, whatever it is SJs get off on does not appeal to me at all.

I'm trying to find some good descriptions of Introverted Intuition, they all seem pretty nebulous so far. It's entirely possible that I am a highly atypical ISTJ but don't think it's a good description for me.

[Uberfuhrer]

I'm trying to find some good descriptions of Introverted Intuition, they all seem pretty nebulous so far. It's entirely possible that I am a highly atypical ISTJ but don't think it's a good description for me.

Jung said of N-dominant types that they're prone to anxieties, phobias, and obsessive-compulsions when neurotic or stressed, while neurotic/stressed S-dominant types tend to give in more to superstitions.

N doesn't necessarily describe one's outlook of the future (whether it's good or bad), but they focus more on the future or unknown while the S type thinks of how to preserve the unforeseeable future, either by enjoying the here-and-now (Se) or by conserving the here-and-now in preparation (Si).

[Jack Flak]

So I think I'm an INTJ.

The whole SJ thing is not working out for me. I keep reading that "SJs are thus-and-such" and I think "I'm not that way, gorram it!" So either everything everyone knows about SJs is wrong or I'm not an SJ. My dad is very much the model ISTJ and I am not my dad. The only other type I could be is INTJ. I read through some INTJ descriptions and the big one on INTJ central and they're pretty close. Nothing in them stands out to make me think "Well I'm definitely not that."

Just thought I'd throw that out. Feel free to object, comment or bake me cookies.

I doubt you're ISTJ because from what little I've read you seem cool.

[Mondo]

Understanding the Eight Jungian Cognitive Processes / Eight Functions Attitudes (http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/assessment/survey.html)

Have you taken this and what are your results?

[sassafrassquatch]

Understanding the Eight Jungian Cognitive Processes / Eight Functions Attitudes (http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/assessment/survey.html)

Have you taken this and what are your results?

See here: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/269957-post1.html

[Mondo]

Your Si and Te are really close and both are really strong.

However, I will also admit that I do not like the Ni questions and can't really say if you are ISTJ or INTJ.
However, I don't think an INTJ would score that high in Si- unless you were deliberately putting "Exactly Like Me" for questions you knew were like Si.

Your Ni is ridiculously low.
You seem like a solid S & T.
One thing I hate about Keirsey is that a lot of the SJ descriptions (conforming to group, harmony over ideas).. these are really traits of XSFJ's NOT XSTJ's. It's a mixture of Fe & Si...

The XSTJ's are as big of conformists as XNFJ's are.. as far as I'm concerned.
Keirsey isn't calling XNFJ's conforming spineless folk now.. is he?

[sassafrassquatch]

The questions on that functions test are so poorly written I can't make sense of them.

5. Experience a premonition or foresee the distant future.

Is that asking if I'm psychic? I don't know what that's supposed to mean.

I may well be an ISTJ, I do seem to operate on SiTe but all the defining characteristics of the SJ temperament do no apply to me. Though I do think everyone has dropped the ball with describing SJs. Nearly everyone seems to think of them as incurious, servile drones which I am definitely not.

[The_Liquid_Laser]

ISTJ's have an "internal guidebook" of sorts that is composed of things that they've decided to focus on throughout their life. A lot of SJ's focus on happy childhood memories, so that is why they talk about the good ole' days, and they don't want things to change so much. If you've focused on things different from the norm then your "internal guidebook" could be pretty different from most SJ's.

Overall most of the descriptions for sensors aren't always accurate particularly if the person is fairly intelligent. For example an intelligent ISTP is more likely to be an engineer than a mechanic, even though most ISTP descriptions make them seem more like a mechanic. Most likely you are a bright ISTJ, and that is why you don't relate to the standard ISTJ descriptions. If you are more interested in proven facts rather than possibilities, and if you have a keen sense toward details that you focus on, then you are probably an ISTJ (or maybe an ESTJ, but I'll assume you've figured out the E/I dimension).

[evan]

That description also sounds fairly accurate. Another thing is that the things which the Guardians are supposedly guarding are those which I am most distrustful of. I place no value on tradition, groups make me nervous, duty and loyalty to institutions mean nothing to me. Being the salt of the earth, a pillar of the community, whatever it is SJs get off on does not appeal to me at all.

I'm trying to find some good descriptions of Introverted Intuition, they all seem pretty nebulous so far. It's entirely possible that I am a highly atypical ISTJ but don't think it's a good description for me.

one of my best friends is an ISTJ and the bolded part is true for him as well. forget the stereotypes for SJs. they can be very individualistic thinkers.

I doubt you're ISTJ because from what little I've read you seem cool.

ugh. using MBTI this way is worse than not using it at all. complete nonsense...

[Jack Flak]

ugh. using MBTI this way is worse than not using it at all. complete nonsense...
It's not nonsense, it's my perception! I've never met an ISTJ I'd call cool, quite the contrary in fact. I don't even think those I knew well considered themselves cool.

[evan]

you can't type people by comparing their personalities to the types (that you don't even really know) of your friends.

if you're going to bother trying to type someone, do it by functions, and throw type descriptions out the window.

[Jack Flak]

you can't type people by comparing their personalities to the types (that you don't even really know) of your friends.

if you're going to bother trying to type someone, do it by functions, and throw type descriptions out the window.
Functional analysis? That's not my favorite method of typing, and I'm not alone. And yes you can type people by behavioral analysis and comparison. These people I speak of also tested as ISTJ.

[sassafrassquatch]

I'd like to know how they come up with these type descriptions. Do they perform extensive testing and interview confirmed types? Is it an average? Or do the people writing them just assume that functions in a certain order will behave a certain way? And then people assume, "Well that guy in the next cubicle is an officious little troll, he must be an ISTJ."

Going by the descriptions if you're an INTP you're fucking Einstein.
An INTJ is a visionary mastermind.
An ISTP, while not described as glowingly as the INTs is good with machines, sports and still an interesting person.
An ISTJ? You're dependable. Well golly gee, isn't that swell!

[Jack Flak]

I'd like to know how they come up with these type descriptions. Do they perform extensive testing and interview confirmed types? Is it an average?

God forbid I look it up, but I think that's the basic foundation of actual MBTI usage. Testing, study, comparison, etc.etc.etc.. As an aside, I think the biggest failure of MBTI statistics is that MBTI is used a lot in employment scenarios, thus people may tend to answer dishonestly, intentionally or not.

[Jack Flak]

Read this book if you haven't: Amazon.com: Please Understand Me II: Temperament, Character, Intelligence: David Keirsey: Books (http://www.amazon.com/Please-Understand-Temperament-Character-Intelligence/dp/1885705026)

People are usually the type they want to be. If you don't want to be ISTJ, you're probably not.

Since writers of 16-type literature tend to be INTP and INFP, it would tend to make the most sense to us overall. It's not something everyone needs to follow.

[proteanmix]

ISTJ's have an "internal guidebook" of sorts that is composed of things that they've decided to focus on throughout their life. A lot of SJ's focus on happy childhood memories, so that is why they talk about the good ole' days, and they don't want things to change so much. If you've focused on things different from the norm then your "internal guidebook" could be pretty different from most SJ's.

Overall most of the descriptions for sensors aren't always accurate particularly if the person is fairly intelligent. For example an intelligent ISTP is more likely to be an engineer than a mechanic, even though most ISTP descriptions make them seem more like a mechanic. Most likely you are a bright ISTJ, and that is why you don't relate to the standard ISTJ descriptions. If you are more interested in proven facts rather than possibilities, and if you have a keen sense toward details that you focus on, then you are probably an ISTJ (or maybe an ESTJ, but I'll assume you've figured out the E/I dimension).

Kinda sad the way an intelligent sensor gets to occupy the neither region between S and N. But this has been discussed, digested, and defecated so I won't go into that.

I think it's good when people question whether they're S or N because that forces you to understand the functions better and usually the difference between sensing and intuiting is the hardest to tell. Once I got a good understanding of what Se, Si, Ne, and Ni was everything got mashed together and I had to look a little harder in order to find a meaningful difference. If it helps, most SJs I know don't fit the typical SJ profile very well either.

If you're an NT you'd prefer this:
Attention to concepts, meanings, interrelationships, and probable or possible futures with a focus on the principles and criteria involved. An abstract, problem-solving approach.

If you're an ST you'd prefer this:
Attention to the tangible realities based on current and past experiences with a focus on “objective” facts, criteria, or principles. A just-the-facts approach.

Source (http://www.16types.com/Request.jsp?hView=DynamicPage&Content=MBTI)

ISTJ Profile (http://bestfittype.com/istj.html)
If you ignore all the duty-bound parts, do you think it fits?

INTJ Profile (http://bestfittype.com/intj.html)
Are the autonomy seeking parts of the INTJ description what you identify with most?

Also you're more than likely to have come into contact with more ISTJs than INTJs. Some times it helps to identify other people that you think might share your type and figure out how similar/dissimilar you are to them.

I'm not going to say what type you are because honestly I don't know. And if you're on the border between S and N I think that's a pretty good place to be because you can do both.

[Uberfuhrer]

Sass, when you first came here, you were an ISTP, correct?

[Edahn]

People are usually the type they want to be. If you don't want to be ISTJ, you're probably not.

You really believe this? If I want to be a T, I'm a T? If I want to be intuitive, I am? There's some truth to this in the sense that your values are based on your strengths, and you'll continue to develop those qualities in yourself if you value them, but I don't really think you can make such a broad sweeping statement like the one you made. There are lots of people who want to be logical but aren't really familiar with how to do it. Same with sensing OR intuition. There are times I'd like to be way less into my head and more grounded and sensory, but it doesn't just magically appear.

[Uberfuhrer]

Well, Jack Flak certainly has a point, especially considering that MBTI measures preference, not ability.

[Jack Flak]

You really believe this? If I want to be a T, I'm a T? If I want to be intuitive, I am? There's some truth to this in the sense that your values are based on your strengths, and you'll continue to develop those qualities in yourself if you value them, but I don't really think you can make such a broad sweeping statement like the one you made. There are lots of people who want to be logical but aren't really familiar with how to do it. Same with sensing OR intuition. There are times I'd like to be way less into my head and more grounded and sensory, but it doesn't just magically appear.
What's your type? What type do you wish you were?

I'm not talking about changing type--ever, let alone daily. You only get to be one type.

[Edahn]

What's your type? What type do you wish you were?

I'm not talking about changing type--ever, let alone daily. You only get to be one type.

I'm untypeable because my preferences and needs change with whatever's going on in my life, and even in my day. Anger will bring out the INT in me. Silliness the ENTP. Calmness the INFP. Tasks will bring out the J in me, too. So I can't answer the first of your questions because I disagree with the statement you made.

As far as preferred type, I can't really say I have a strong preference, and even if I did, it would probably change with time and circumstance. My ideal self has qualities and attributes, but they're not related to any of the stuff MBTI deals with.

[Jack Flak]

I'm untypeable because my preferences and needs change with whatever's going on in my life, and even in my day. Anger will bring out the INT in me. Silliness the ENTP. Calmness the INFP. Tasks will bring out the J in me, too.
You must be ISTJ then. http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/mbti-enneagram-other-personality-matrices/7316-stereotype-types-positions-mbti.html#post275125

[Edahn]

You must be ISTJ then. http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/mbti-enneagram-other-personality-matrices/7316-stereotype-types-positions-mbti.html#post275125

Wow. That's totally it.

[Night]

I second Edahn as ISTJ.



;)

[sassafrassquatch]

Sass, when you first came here, you were an ISTP, correct?

I have typed myself first as INTP then ISTP and currently ISTJ. I joined MBTIc right after I retyped as ISTP having spent some months on INTPc and seeing that I had nothing in common with actual INTPs. I went from ISTP to ISTJ once I understood that J meant a desire for closure and certainty rather than being a fastidious neat freak.

I initially thought I was INTP because I had read that geeks and nerds are mostly INTPs and INTJs and I'm a fairly geeky/nerdy guy. I can't do algebra or hack unix but it's close enough.

In terms of Myers-Briggs and equivalent psychometric systems, hackerdom appears to concentrate the relatively rare INTJ and INTP types; that is, introverted, intuitive, and thinker types (as opposed to the extroverted-sensate personalities that predominate in the mainstream culture). ENT[JP] types are also concentrated among hackers but are in a minority.

Personality Characteristics (http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/personality.html)

That is where I first heard about MBTI.

I don't suppose enneagram types would help at all? I've tested several times months apart as being equally 5 and 6 50/50 right down the middle.

[Uberfuhrer]

I have typed myself first as INTP then ISTP and currently ISTJ. I joined MBTIc right after I retyped as ISTP having spent some months on INTPc and seeing that I had nothing in common with actual INTPs.

Ah, there's your problem, LOL -- if you are an INTP, you probably just didn't fit into their stereotypical clique.

Did you take the online Keirsey Temperament Sorter? That's actually a good test unlike the Human Metrics test, which is where most people seem to "discover" their type.

You can get an account at Personality Zone (http://www.personalityzone.com/) and take the test from there. Your full four-letter results will then show up there in your account.

It is probably most pragmatic to take a test before learning about the types. When you do it the other way around, you just wind up falling into stereotypes. And to some extent, when reading the descriptions, I'll identify with all of the types on some level.

[sassafrassquatch]

Ah, there's your problem, LOL -- if you are an INTP, you probably just didn't fit into their stereotypical clique.

Did you take the online Keirsey Temperament Sorter?

If I recall correctly I read PUM II when I thought I was an INTP and had just joined INTPc. I think I did the sorter and got INTP, I also had my parents do it and they both got ISTJ.

Before I found the INTPc forum I had found and read the great big INTP description on the main INTP Central page and thought it was eerily accurate. Several "how the fuck do you know that?" moments. My initial, pure, virginal impression, having had no contact with or knowledge of MBTI or real INTPs was that I was an INTP.

[Uberfuhrer]

If I recall correctly I read PUM II when I thought I was an INTP and had just joined INTPc. I think I did the sorter and got INTP, I also had my parents do it and they both got ISTJ.

Before I found the INTPc forum I had found and read the great big INTP description on the main INTP Central page and thought it was eerily accurate. Several "how the fuck do you know that?" moments. My initial, pure, virginal impression, having had no contact with or knowledge of MBTI or real INTPs was that I was an INTP.

Based on this data, I'd say you're an INTP, just not an INTPc INTP.

In my experience over there, they seem to doubt anyone's INTP type if they do not adhere to their personal idea of what an INTP should be (it's pretty much the same deal at any type-specific forum). If you look at the Keirsey descriptions of any of the Rational types or even Please Understand Me II, nowhere does it say that they are philosophers, mathematicians, or scientists, per say -- those are merely generalities that a number of people seem to take literally.

It's true that when N and T combine, it results in a strategic intellect. The Rational type is never directly described in terms of being scientific, rather their approach to life is strategic and concerned with efficiency above all else. Hence, they are pragmatic. This same sort of strategic intellect is applied not just to the sciences, but to any profession the NT's mind is set on. Same with any other temperament.

[sassafrassquatch]

Well that's interesting. The sorter on Personality Zone says I'm INTP.

Round and round we go...

[Uberfuhrer]

Well that's interesting. The sorter on Personality Zone says I'm INTP.

Round and round we go...

Like I said...

I don't think you should dismiss what that sorter says. And apparently, the KTS and MBTI are correlated. They ask the same kinds of questions. I think the real reason MBTI practitioners are critical of the KTS because the KTS is free and draws MBTI customers away.

[sassafrassquatch]

4 U! :cheers:

http://i195.photobucket.com/albums/z9/rabidhominid/cookie.jpg

I guess I'll relabel myself INTP then. Only reason started doubting it in the first place was because of the wankers on INTPc. :wacko:

[Jack Flak]

4 U! :cheers:

I guess I'll relabel myself INTP then. Only reason started doubting it in the first place was because of the wankers on INTPc. :wacko:
I've been over there. It was a little depressing.

[Carebear]

I think INTP is the closest you get to a type based on what I've read both here and over at intpc, sass. You have INTJ tendencies and ISTx on occasion, but you still seem closer to INTP. The other tendencies just mean you're more balanced.

[htb]

And yes you can type people by behavioral analysis and comparison.I agree with this.

Behavioral analysis is the surest method -- everything else is the comparison of theoretical values, many of them set in symmetry that could very well be arbitrary.

Strip away the "intuitive sensing thinking judger" or function orders, and one may have a temperament that has been evident in several people known over the years. It's one reason why I tend to use the Enneagram as a final determinant of the general personality, or to distinguish between subtypes that are apparent with some MBTI types.

ISTPs, for example, are people that I've known all my life and, intelligent or average, every single one has behaved, had talents and held values that were remarkably similar. Very few of them could be considered disorganized, each was extraordinarily particular and most of them had adjusted to a level of punctuality required in the working world; their nature of perceiving isn't effectively gauged by most tests.

Behaviorally, expressively, even visually, Sass, you look ISTP.

[Uberfuhrer]

*facepalm*

I truthfully don't think anyone here is mistyped, especially considering that the type owner is more aware of his cognitive functioning than anyone else. What amounts afterward is what stereotype people put themselves into.

It's just a four-letter code that is supposed to be formed out of a test, not the often inaccurate description that follows.

I think people place too much emphasis on the behavior aspects and not enough on the person's own method of thought processing, which are not necessarily alike.

[sassafrassquatch]

you still seem closer to INTP

you look ISTP.

You two fight it out, let me know who wins. :D

[htb]

I'd sooner backhand a monk than take on an INFP, let alone a sage like Carebear.

(Even though your invitation to a pit fight does support my argument.)

[The_Liquid_Laser]

If it makes any difference "The Dude" (i.e. your avatar) is probably an ISTP.

[sassafrassquatch]

And I do love the Dude.

[Uberfuhrer]

Some sources say The Dude is an ENFP. (Jeff Bridges himself is probably an ENTP, though.)

[sassafrassquatch]

An expanded analysis of Big Lebowski (http://www.geocities.com/myersbriggstypology/lebowski.htm)

[Uberfuhrer]

Crap. :(

<----But the Cyberdemon is the Guardian of Hell and thus likely an ISFJ. ;)

[Jack Flak]

An expanded analysis of Big Lebowski (http://www.geocities.com/myersbriggstypology/lebowski.htm)
You know, I'd say ISFP for The Dude. I'm not sure, and I'll never be, because I thought the whole movie was "Just OK."

[Carebear]

I'd sooner backhand a monk than take on an INFP, let alone a sage like Carebear.

(Even though your invitation to a pit fight does support my argument.)

Fear the Care Bear Stare!

(And the pit fight invitation could as easily be INTP, ENTP or ESTP.;))

[sassafrassquatch]

Just curious about one more thing.

I've always been interested in astronomy, theoretical physics (black holes, wormholes, the big bang), theoretical particle physics, and futurism. The prechewed spoon fed version that Brian Greene, Michio Kaku and Ray Kurzweil write about. Before I became an atheist and rationalist I really liked UFOs and bigfoot and all the other stuff that Art Bell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Bell) talked about.

Are those the sort of things that Ne feeds on?

[Uberfuhrer]

Are those the sort of things that Ne feeds on?

I would say so. Ne wonders about what is in the unknown.

Se, being the ultimate realist, per Jung, wants to experience the unknown firsthand. Ne is content in speculating about the unknown.

[sassafrassquatch]

Shiny. :nice:

[Jack Flak]

Just curious about one more thing.

I've always been interested in astronomy, theoretical physics (black holes, wormholes, the big bang), theoretical particle physics, and futurism. The prechewed spoon fed version that Brian Greene, Michio Kaku and Ray Kurzweil write about. Before I became an atheist and rationalist I really liked UFOs and bigfoot and all the other stuff that Art Bell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_Bell) talked about.

Are those the sort of things that Ne feeds on?

Being interested in an interesting subject is not unique to any type. If you write a book on physics, you're much more likely NT (than SP for example).

[htb]

(And the pit fight invitation could as easily be INTP, ENTP or ESTP.;))Those sages, now, they're tricky.

[sassafrassquatch]

Got some more thoughts rattling around in my head. Not really about my own type but about other INTPs, I don't think it warrants a new thread so I'll recycle this one.

I'm trying to figure out what the deal is with the INTPs of INTPc. As I said before my dissimilarity to them was the impetus for doubting my INTPness in the first place. I know now that comparing myself to other people is not the proper way to determine type. As much as my dissimilarity to other INTPs nags at me I'm trying to ignore it.

Anyway, I searched INTPc for threads on Enneagram and Big 5/SLOAN test results to try to determine some differences which MBTI might not account for. I found that the vast majority of them are Big 5 RCUEIs with some RLUEIs and this poll (http://forums.intpcentral.com/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=1631) of Enneagram types gave 124 5w4s to 43 5w6s. I am an RLUEI and 5w6 so at least among the forum dwelling INTPs I am something of a minority.

So what I want to know is do the INTPc INTPs represent the average INTP? Are they what normal INTPs are like or are they a group of very unhealthy personalities gathered together in an egotistic circle jerk to make themselves feel better?

[Jack Flak]

A lot of the INTPc folk seem to have what I would call home school syndrome. Their opinions are unwise and 100% theory based.

[sassafrassquatch]

...unwise and 100% theory based.

Having been home schooled myself, I endorse this message.

[Cimarron]

A thank you to the people contributing to this thread. It was somewhat helpful, and had a lot of relevance for me.
:yes: