Personality Cafe banner

Thinker Feeler Differences

127K views 221 replies 130 participants last post by  exciting fisherman 
#1 ·
In the spirit of John Gray's book, Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus (which I have not read, the title says it all), I am offering some insights on the differences between MBTI Thinkers and Feelers, which I have observed over the years. This is not about men and women, because many of the men I meet are Feelers or Feeler-wannabes; and I suspect there are a comparable number of Thinker women, although I don't meet very many of them.

Although item 6 quotes from a humorous list, this analysis is not intended to be understood as a joke.

1. The labels "Thinker" and "Feeler" are not descriptive of what those people do. Thinkers are not smarter than Feelers, nor are Feelers more sensitive. Thinkers have feelings, and Feelers are able to reason logically. The fundamental difference is the values they hold in highest esteem: Thinkers give priority to Truth and Justice; Feelers give priority to Relationships and affirmation. That's the only difference, and it only applies when truth and affirmation are at odds, which tends to be more often than some people would like to admit. I would consider the labels unfortunate, except that any labels would soon develop the same or similar problems (see #5 below).

2. Thinkers are able to honestly recognize Feeler values in other people and adjust their actions accordingly. Given sufficient motivation (such as preserving a relationship that depends on it, or keeping one's job), Feelers are willing to put aside their distaste for disaffirmation to deal with uncomfortable truths. In neither case is that their respective preference.

3. Science and technology require an absolutely honest understanding of nature and physics, for which Thinker values work best. Educational institutions and the arts are more successful using Feeler values. Competitive activities like sports are more successful with an honest assessment of the competition and the factors that lead to excellence, which again favors Thinker values. Modern business is highly competitive, which dominates any relationship issues they might have with their employees and customers. Some customers will favor good business relationships (Feeler values), but most of them favor quality and price (driven by Thinker values). Democratic governments are sustained by good relationships with other politicians and voters; while the election process is often highly competitive, the relationship issues (Feeler values) tend to dominate political activity. This may not be the case in autocratic regimes, but I don't live under one, so I can't tell.

4. The global and American economy is driven by science and technology and modern business methods -- in other words, by Thinker values. Political and artistic considerations are not as significant as financial and technological issues for achieving wealth and power. This tends to give Thinkers a higher prestige status than Feelers in the public perception.

5. To describe a Thinker as a Thinker is both honest and affirming (because of #4 above), but to describe a Feeler as a Feeler is often felt to be disaffirming or demeaning, for the same reason. Feelers therefore wish to imagine themselves Thinkers, regardless of the facts. Just as there is only one answer to the question, "Are you lying?" (No), regardless of whether the respondent is telling the truth or lying, so also everybody wants to tell you they are a Thinker: the actual Thinkers follow their own values by telling the truth, and the Feelers also affirm their own values in lying about it -- but in doing so they violate the values they falsely claim of themselves.

6. Feelers tend to see an insult in every remark except those that are clearly complimentary -- and in some of those too. Thinkers tend to find truth in every remark except those that are clearly lies -- and in some of those too. There is a half-serious anonymous list of "The Guy's Rules" going around, one of which reads

If something we said can be interpreted two ways and one of them makes you sad or angry, then we meant the other one.
This is a good insight.
7. The American church (including the churches under its influence worldwide) is run by and for the exclusive benefit of Feelers. Thinkers are invited, but only if they agree to pretend to be Feelers. Some Thinkers succeed at the charade, most just stay away. Truth is, after all, their highest value. The Bible is more balanced, giving a slight preference to Thinker values, but an overwhelming preference to Truth over "relationship". The church power structure mostly ignores the Bible when promoting their Feeler values as "Christian".

8. Feelers believe it is important to say they love you, and to hear you say it to them, because that is affirming; Thinkers prefer to do loving things, and to see correspondence between the words and the deeds, because correspondence to reality is the test of truth.


Tom Pittman
1st draft 2007 March 24
Rev. 08 Feb 9, 09 Apr 30
Thinker-Feeler Differences
 
See less See more
#71 ·
Did anyone else listen to these? She gives heavy emphasis on 'rational' or 'irrational', explaining that the notion that Thinkers are rational and feelers are irrational isn't true. Instead, they're both rational, but use different rational methods to arrive at their decisions based on their Thinker or Feeling functions. What she's missing is the fact that to Thinker, making decisions based on feeling IS irrational, and to Feelers, making decisions based on logic and ignoring their inner values IS irrational. So to say they're both using rationality is only correct in the right context.

I think the biggest lesson here is accepting and realizing that AS a Thinker, even though YOU feel a Feeler is irrational, you have to also realize the Feeler thinks you're irrational. It IS irrational for a Thinker to make a feeling based decision, and it IS irrational for a Feeler to make a thinking based decision! Learning to accept and appreciate another's function (Regardless if it's T/F or P/J) is exceedingly important for harmony. But to try and paint them both equally rational and appeal to the greater population leads to more confusion, IMHO. We need to see, understand and respect the "irrationality" among one another.

For further analysis, let's look at the definition of rational:

1. Agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible: a rational plan for economic development.
2. Having or exercising reason, sound judgment, or good sense: a calm and rational negotiator.
3. Being in or characterized by full possession of one's reason; sane; lucid: The patient appeared perfectly rational.

For both a Thinker and a Feeler, their own respective decision process IS rational to themselves, and the other--BY DEFINITION--IS irrational.
 
#3 ·
I actually love justice and support the death penalty. I love sports and was a very in-your-face competitor when I played in basketball leagues. I also don't need words of support constantly; I prefer actions.

My favorite way to differentiate between thinkers and feelers (having an INTJ mom and INTP fiance) is that thinkers prefer operating in the inanimate realm, whereas feelers are more interested in persons. I admit that science, math, and tech do not come as easily for me as they do for the thinkers. If I can't apply something from the inanimate realm directly to people in some way, it's harder for me to maintain interest in analyzing it.
 
#81 ·
I don't know about thinkers not being interested in people. I actually like observing interactions between people and I know of others thinkers who do. I haven't reach a conclusion on the differences between thinkers and feelers yet, but somehow what you said here doesn't feel quite right. This seems to distinguish thinkers as robots operating in an inanimate way, whereas feelers are truly humans who have interests and understandings in others.

I think it's nice we're trying to put together what the world outside is like but doing so seems limiting.
 
#4 ·
What if you're horrible with math and technological things but aren't that interested in people issues (like politics) either? What if you're good with musical instruments (inanimate objects) but not techy things? What if you find yourself feeling compassion (Feeling) for inanimate objects, such as cars left in a junkyard?

And where do plants and animals fit in this dichotomy, seeing as how they are neither people nor inanimate objects?
 
#46 ·
My "compassion" for inanimate objects comes from an internal value system, chiefly, reducing waste. For example, in the past I've been wandering along a river or foreshore and seen boats left to rot and ruin and then been angry about how people can allow perfectly good (and expensive) articles take the responsbility for their personal problems or lack knowledge about their own limitations. I mean, if you bought a $100,000 boat and discovered you couldn't or didn't want to keep it, wouldn't you sell it rather than let your investment rot away to nothing? The sensation of anger or compassion for the inanimate was really just my intuition communicating. Once the feelings were articulated, the truth became clear. These days I walk on, not concerned with what people waste and apply the value to myself only. Same goes for plants. Very careful about bringing living things into my home that would do better on their own "in the wild". Plants become livining works of art when inside. They are always wanted as participants in the environment, not scapegoats for my flaws. On the other hand, the vision of a car junkyard may suggest waste, but if old broken down gear is stripped for parts and the bodies crushed and melted down, it becomes one of recycling (practical terms), rebirth and rejuvenation.


Yeah, I'm definitely T, then. I prefer Truth and Justice, and as a result was sorely disappointed with the ending of The Lovely Bones, though I'm told the book is better. The point about religion was interesting. I remember starting to feel uncomfortable and skeptical in church at the age of 7 when I noticed everyone was droning along together and I couldn't figure out why. Who were they talking to? God. Why does he require them to speak on mass. He's hard of hearing. No he isn't, he probably has a million ears. Mommy, I just want to sit here and read...Though I am spiritual, mystical. I'm a pantheist. I believe that god is nature, particles, a disinterested yet loving entity made up of energy that sees time all at once from all perspectives. Course I don't know, but that's what I project onto the concept because I like that idea. I'm watching a Joseph Campbell documentary now.:wink:


Though, I do like hearing "I love you" repeated over and over and over again, but I like to see proof, ie. the deeds.
This is the way I felt about it too and I'm an NF.

I've also noticed that when I do get emotional, it is rather primitive and I don't particularly understand it, though I am definitely pretty deep and sensitive. It's like Mark Twain said, 'All true emotions are involuntary." I tend to cry over anger caused by injustice, not sadness. Sometimes it comes out of the blue, when, rationally I don't know why the occurence warranted tears. I like crying. It's cathartic and mysterious. My emotions tend to be so all or nothing that they strike me as sublime, not gradual or spaced out over a reasonable period of time. And when I am in a bad mood, it doesn't last long. The storm is here, then it's over. Love is the only thing capable of making me really brood. I tend to get mad at myself when emotions make me irrational and I can't seem to trace their origin. The best emotions are caused by a mix of oxytocin and someone I really really like ;)
This is where we differ, I more or less understand my feelings/emotions, like meeting friends or people on the street. The ones I'm familiar with, I know what each one wants or how to deal with it and don't get angry at myself for meeting them. As kibou said earlier:

.... So whether you're INFP or INTP, you're going to use both F and T. The question is, how do you use each?
 
#5 ·
It's one way, it's not a way that explains everything. The MBTI itself doesn't explain everything, let alone one way of differentiating between feelers and thinkers.

Anyway, to address issues point by point:

Politics is a mix anyway - most politicians spend hours going over impersonal details of bills, so even though the end results affect people, I don't consider politics one of the more feeler-friendly realms. Politicians also can't be very conflict-avoidant to be effective, which feelers tend to be (especially introverted ones).

The use of musical instruments is a means to personal expression, so I can see feelers having interest in those.

Compassion for objects is an interesting one. Compassion is stereotypically a feely thing, though, and if you have memories associated with a particular car, I can see wanting to keep it from the junkyard.

Animals, though not people, qualify for the animate realm. I should have stated animate realm more than inanimate realm, though again there are qualifications and exceptions here (as there are for many things in the MBTI, which is why so many people loathe the system and find it too vague). I am not sure how plants are usually assessed in the dichotomy.
 
#6 ·
The fundamental difference is the values they hold in highest esteem: Thinkers give priority to Truth and Justice
Ewwww!! ehhm, can't agree with that one, justice is mainly a relative term, not an universal one, we can even argue that there isn't something as justice to begin with, this is one of another "quality values" that feelers have, not to be put with thinking types I think.

:tongue:
 
#222 ·
Ewwww!! ehhm, can't agree with that one, justice is mainly a relative term, not an universal one, we can even argue that there isn't something as justice to begin with, this is one of another "quality values" that feelers have, not to be put with thinking types I think.

👅
What makes me think whether I am INTP ot ENTP,
note: Im very psyhically aware.
 
#7 ·
Truth and Justice, sure... but didn't we leave out The American Way?

I work in law, and I find the idea of justice to be an interesting bird. It's something people invoke a lot when they don't know the law--or, more accurately, how much pursuing "justice" will cost. E.g., someone getting a divorce wants "justice" against their soon-to-be-former spouse: discovery, filing every motion that is possible in their situation, and then the full trial. But then they learn "justice" costs at least a mean $50K. If they're at all sane, they settle for something a bit less drastic than full "justice" at that point.

Then there's justice versus the law. E.g., the state constitution forbids gay marriage. I think that's unjust, but I've taken an oath to uphold that same constitution. The law as it exists is what controls. My personal opinions are just that: personal, and mere opinions.

Maybe there's a more universal form of justice, but that gets into the realms of philosophy and spirituality. I rather enjoy those realms, on a personal level, but the practicalities of day-to-day life don't always mesh with higher ideals. And sometimes they can't and shouldn't. There are more than a few laws out there that might not seem to make sense from one person's "justice" perspective, but that are actually amazingly fair from an objective perspective.
 
#8 ·
Mind you no one is 100% one way or the other, but I believe the main difference between thinkers and feelers is that feelers are about values, emphasis, good and bad, more towards categorizing or placing value on the subjective. Thinkers are about facts, usefulness, right and wrong, working more with the objective side to things (or what they believe is Objective).
 
#9 ·
7. The American church (including the churches under its influence worldwide) is run by and for the exclusive benefit of Feelers. Thinkers are invited, but only if they agree to pretend to be Feelers. Some Thinkers succeed at the charade, most just stay away. Truth is, after all, their highest value. The Bible is more balanced, giving a slight preference to Thinker values, but an overwhelming preference to Truth over "relationship". The church power structure mostly ignores the Bible when promoting their Feeler values as "Christian".
Actually, the fundies and denoms where conservative theologies dominate behavior are run by Thinkers -- STJ style of thinking. It doesn't matter how you feel about things, it doesn't matter what your personal values are, if your theology is not right, then you are operating from a false basis of faith and you need to fix your theology in order to be acceptable to God. "Right and Wrong" is applied as a derived rule system of universal truth, not as a personal-values system.

This is why some of these denoms can treat people with great disrespect and violate their autonomy and violate that person's identity and sense of self, and justify it as holy... because they are following their "religious theology" that was derived by Thinking types that tell people what they have to believe and what exactly they need to do in any particular situation.

Tangible rules governing behavior (i.e., religious protocol) have been derived, mysteries are cut and chopped off so that they can be fit into a definable box. Get into an apologetics debate with the conservative crowds and you'll quickly bump heads with Te-style thinking that has been over-applied to what should have been more iNtuitive or Feeling by nature.
 
#10 ·
^^ Evangelical religion is the implementation of a specific regimen (strict rules) in order to attain a certain goal (eternal life), which is definitely Te. The manifestation of Si is that these rules tend to be common societal standards already in existence.

However, the difference is that in the end, the important part is not the experience of religious feeling, as it's only at rare points that this actually happens (since their feeling functions are decidedly Fe). Rather, it's that everything is going according to plan, or in their mind, "God's plan".

This is contrasted to the truly "spiritual" people, who tend to be Fi users.
 
#11 ·
5. To describe a Thinker as a Thinker is both honest and affirming (because of #4 above), but to describe a Feeler as a Feeler is often felt to be disaffirming or demeaning, for the same reason. Feelers therefore wish to imagine themselves Thinkers, regardless of the facts. Just as there is only one answer to the question, "Are you lying?" (No), regardless of whether the respondent is telling the truth or lying, so also everybody wants to tell you they are a Thinker: the actual Thinkers follow their own values by telling the truth, and the Feelers also affirm their own values in lying about it -- but in doing so they violate the values they falsely claim of themselves.


According to the interpretation below, the INTP has inferior extraverted feeling and will conform to social nicities as a means to be accepted. Conforming in such a way is not truth, it is giving in to an (dare I say?) emotion, then logically rationalizing why it is good to do so. There is a yin and yang quality of the functions, I find. One can not exist without the other. Thinkers lie to themselves (and others) just as much as feelers do. They may fool themselves into believing that they are telling an objective truth because they use logic to lie. The fallacy is in the fact that they are not being objective about their self and the way that they feel.

How do you differentiate between somebody who scores extremely high on cognitive tests in all Ti, Te, Fi and Fe??? Would it be fair to classify someone with such a score as a thinker if in the past when they were less healthy, appeared devoid of almost all emotion to others including themself?

For the full article, please check this link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intp

Dominant: Introverted Thinking (Ti)
Ti seeks precision, such as the exact word to express an idea. It notices the minute distinctions that define the essence of things, then analyzes and classifies them. Ti examines all sides of an issue, looking to solve problems while minimizing effort and risk. It uses models to root out logical inconsistency. [15] Ti is calm, articulate, and aware of the forces that bind reality together. As introverted Thinkers, INTPs spend the majority of their time and energy ordering the interior, logical world of principles and generalizations in an effort to understand.

Inferior: Extraverted Feeling (Fe)

Fe seeks social connections and creates harmonious interactions through polite, considerate, and appropriate behavior. Fe responds to the explicit (and implicit) wants of others, and may even create an internal conflict between the subject’s own needs and the desire to meet the needs of others. [18] Fe drives the INTP to desire harmony in community. At their most relaxed, INTPs can be charming and outgoing among friends, or when they have a clearly defined role in the group. When under stress, however, INTPs can feel disconnected from the people around them, unable to use their extraverted Feeling to reach out to others. As their inferior function, Feeling can be a weak point; when threatened they will hide behind a wall of stoic logic. This can lead them to bottle up their emotions to preserve reason and harmony; but a failure to deal with these concealed emotions can lead to childish outbursts.
 
#12 ·
These things always make me think I am T. I always test with a weak F.
But I have read many, many descriptions of INFJ and INTJ, and INFJ always describes me nearly perfectly. INTJ is almost always very far off.

I suppose my E-5 function could have something to do with this. It does contradict my F somewhat.
 
#13 ·
That is an interesting point. Often the other parts of a personality go with the T or F though, like maybe since introverted feelers don't really share their feelings aloud as often as extroverted feelers do they then have the time to make their ideas come out more as T-like statements. Also from what I can gather about the intuitive side, it makes you more grey, so you're probably open to both sides, which could be why you come out as an F, but think you are a T?

Jobs relating to T vs. F also have a lot to do with the other letter as well. If you are an ST or SF your words are going to come out in a lot more detail that an NF or NT, and you probably think that way too. Like I know I really like reading and history because I'm good at remembering details, but I have a lot of NT friends who aren't as good at that because they always complain about so much information. Then again, they're a lot better at math then I am. Like I'm sure that SF's probably are good at the arts and NF's may be better at teaching or english? Not really sure, that just seems to be how my friends and family work out. It doesn't mean the others can't do it, just that it may not come as easily. But I still think that thinking and feeling aspects really combine with the other letters as well.
 
#17 ·
a good friend of mine on here cleared it quite nicely for me:


FEELER:

subjective-
Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world. (Based on feelings)

THINKER:

objective-
Of or having to do with a material object. Having actual existence or reality. Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices. (Based on logic)
 
#20 ·
Well, based off of what I've read of Jung's descriptions of Ti and Fe, they do the opposite of what's implied by the explanation that you provided. Ti at it's root is subjective. It's an internal logical interpretation of the external world in relation to ones self. Fe is the creation of harmony in the environment. Rather than starting internally, it begins externally.
 
#21 ·
I've always thought the T/F dichotomy represents the neuro-psychological manifestation of the philosophical distinction between Facts and Values.

Ti: Judgments based on an internal system of relating facts (logic, etc.)
Te: Judgments based on an external system of relating facts (empiricism)

Fi: Judgments based on an internal system relating values (???)
Fe: Judgments based on an external system relating values (social systems, politeness, etc.)
 
#23 ·
Those descriptions are interesting. The problem with them is they focus on traits rather than functions. MBTI is about functional stacking order and trait dichotomies are just shorthand for that. Most tests make the same fundamental mistake, asking questions for one side or the other of a trait dichotomy instead of on function versus it's opposite function or even some other function.

Te, for example, is very concerned with rules and procedures. It is also empirical by nature, looking for specific data to draw conclusions. By definition, someone leading with Te should answer test questions geared toward trait dichotomies somewhat toward the S side. In reality, tests like this don't have any means to discriminate between the preferred auxiliary function, in thise case, either Ni or Si.

The same principle applies to the T/F distinction. The descriptions given by the OP are heavily geared toward extraverts, who use thier thinking or feeling function as primary. Things are a bit different for introverts. Introverts either a)lead with a percieving function, or b)lead with an introverted judging function. In case a, Ni or Si trumps Te or Fe as a general rule (not in every situation). In case b, Ti or Fi is focused internally and not expressed directly or readily as a general rule. In both cases, the outer behaviors and attitudes ascribed to T/F in the descriptions represent those who lead with an extraverted rational function the most, since they are a)leading with a judging function and b)leading with an extraverted function simultaneously.

It's not a coincidence that the people who expressed disatisfaction with the descriptions have thus far been introverts, because they don't apply to them as in black and white a manner. My reasons are different: The descriptions violate my sense of how functional stacking manifests in real people, it seems factually incorrect to me, so I felt compelled to point it out.
 
#24 ·
Thinking vs. Feeling
Decision-making Function


Someone who has a “thinking” preference will tend to make decisions using cause-effect logic, will focus on the problem first and the people second, tend to critique first then appreciate, acknowledge differences as a path to resolution, focus on the content of a message, and search for the underlying principles of a decision; Thinkers’ decision are usually objective, analytical, non-personal, and they will seek clarity and justice in and through their decisions.

Someone who has a “feeling” preference will tend to make decisions using person-centered values, will focus on the people first and the problem second, tend to appreciate first then critique, acknowledge common ground as a path to resolution, focus on the impact of a message, and search for the underlying values of a decision; Feelers’ decisions are usually subjective, experiential, circumstantial and they will seek harmony and mercy in and through their decisions.

(Got this off a website)
 
#25 ·
I've never taken the official MBTI exam, but I've taken several different tests online and get about the same in each one. I'm strongly INP, but on the line between T and F, with usually a very slight lean to F. Both INTP and INFP describe me equally well, and I can get annoyed with people I meet who are extremes of either side :p

I've always been an avid debater plus equal parts daydreamer and deep thinker. I noticed the thinking/feeling differences in people before discovering MBTI and codified my interpretation of those functions for myelf before I ever knew I was an INXP

Logic/Objectivity are tools for generating understanding and cooperation in fairness between varying value systems, but when unbalanced by feeling/subjectivity can lose sight of its ultimate purpose and lead to actions and attitudes which betray human need. I've always seen this most often in people who cling too stubbornly to blunt objectivity and drive people away because they can't be convinced to turn their logical functions towards developing social tact. They may be presenting what they think is the best objective compromise, but without applying Feeling, they're terrible at selling that compromise to others. Since discovering MBTI, I've especially noticed that introverted thinking types tend to run information through their value systems and present the conclusions as fact, while refusing to admit that those conclusions are in fact the product of a value system. I've seen many discussions turn bitter over this behavior.

Feeling/Subjectivity are used to generate value systems, which are inherently relativistic in nature, and thus (whether admitted or not) serve as a launching point for the logical functions, as all formations of objectivity and logic begin with interpretation of information that is limited by the subjective limitations of knowledge/experience. Feeling is also responsible for the most fundamental fabric of human relationships - that connection (good or bad) which may be explained only after it is developed. I think this is the part of us that gives us direction and meaning in life. Without the value systems generated by feeling, there is no way to generate priorities in life which translate into goals and eventually action. If feeling is left unchecked by thinking, it can also easily betray itself because selective use of objectivity is required to create the harmony it desires. Without any Thinking bridging the gap to value systems held by other individuals, which is what enables fairness and cooperation, pure Feeling is doomed to destroy the connections it creates.

I may be completely missing the point here, as I haven't read much about the stacking of functions in MBTI, but I hope I've offered something. I really think and feel that T/F is a very important balance for people to achieve and respect. I also agree that modern society is excessively T oriented.
 
#27 ·
These explanations have been a fascinating read - thanks all! A few months ago, I took the Myers-Briggs and tested INFP. Then I took one today and tested INTP. I am under a lot of pressure in my life right now and feel like I am the only person who is "holding the fort" or "staying grounded" for my children and fiance. I've heard others say before that Feelers can become Thinkers through changes in circumstances or through sheer determination and cognitive-behavioral modification. Do you believe this to be true? Why or why not? If I am an INFP when others are holding the fort and an INTP when I am responsible for doing so, which might you say is my "true" attribute, T or F?
 
#31 ·
I'm not sure, but you sound awfully INFP to me! The difference between INFP and INTP isn't just whether you use "F" or "T", what type of F and T you use.

INFP: Fi, Te
INTP: Ti, Fe

Which description fits you better, introverted thinking or introverted feeling?

According to MBTI, people don't change types, but rely on different functions at different times. So whether you're INFP or INTP, you're going to use both F and T. The question is, how do you use each?
 
#67 ·
The Prelude Consulting personality test has to be the worst, most inaccurate I've ever taken. The questions are foolishly posed as requests for an opinion rather than asking for an objective analysis of the self. To ask someone if they prefer "being seen" a certain way is not likely to receive a useful, accurate answer, or even asking the right question.

"I would choose: Tact or Truthfulness".:angry:

This is question irritates me to no end. They clearly have no idea what the definitions of these words truly are. Tact and truth do not contradict each other at all, nor are they part of a dichotomy. Tact involves the way something is said, not what is said. The most blunt person in the world can be a stone-faced liar while another who chooses his words carefully the most honest. The T/F questions were so bad that I actually got INTJ, and I NEVER get INTJ.

And the descriptions are so absolutist that they are bound to exclude nearly half of the type population, especially the Introverted Judgers. Please, I recommend that you do not recommend that test ever again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: niss
#29 ·
Lol! I got ESTP on the first test and INTP on the second. I noticed as I went through the second test that I had actually taken the first test thinking more about survival and fear, while taking the second one thinking about hope and rejuvenation. Mood has SO much influence on how these tests turn out... Anyway, I got T on both, so maybe it's safe to go with T for now!
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top