Hmm, that's true, typing someone just from their writing can be problematic.
... what's the differences with SF and STs? ... how can i tell if that's just how everyone think
I'm ... Not really a trained writer... english is my second-language... can you define "cohesive and logical"? I'm barely a young adult... limited life experience might prove to be my bane...
The fact that you need an example points to your being a sensor; otherwise... you would look over your own writing and see the lack of cohesion... Comb through the mass of words...look for contradictions; look for 'going off on a tangent'; look for asking or asserting something and then asking about ideas and asserting some more facts that don't add up.
At 18... I knew I wrote poorly--by my standards, and regardless of assurance from others, because I had the 'ear' for that... I had that kind of judgment for visual art as well, e.g. I used mixed media, other visual forms, and although many people were impressed or delighted with the work, I had an inner sense of what I wanted to express,
In college, first time around, I did so well in writing that my English comp teacher and I (she was a professional poet as well) became friends. She allowed me to skip her class, come to her office with my assignments which she graded after we haggled over punctuation marks and other details... talk[ed] shop.
Many years later, as I was publishing a spate of writing... my son gave me a used keyboard. I bought a metronome, music books and began learning the keyboard.
My ear for that was fine-tuned, and I knew I would never be more than mediocre at it. [Besides] I had wanted to play the piano, so music I heard (not just played) on keyboard sounded tinny to my ear. I gave that up.
I became a literary critic after the founder of Alsop Review asked me to join the staff and "keep doing what you are doing as your critiques are excellent."
So I added writing and publishing literary critiques to my list of writing forms; using that form not only improved my ear, but gave me the opportunity to help others improve their writing.
Now, I'll quote from Gifts Differing on SF vs. ST:
Sensing Plus Thinking
The ST (sensing plus thinking) people rely primarily on sensing for purposes of perception and on thinking for purposes of judgment.
Thus, their main interest [STs] focuses upon facts, because facts can be collected and verified directly by the senses--by seeing, hearing, touching, counting, weighing, measuring.
ST people approach their decisions regarding these facts by impersonal analysis, because of their trust in thinking, with its step-by-step logical process of reasoning from cause to effect, from premise to conclusion.
In consequence, their personalities tend to be practical and matter-of-fact, and their best chances of success and satisfaction lie in fields that demand impersonal analysis of concrete facts, such as economics, law, surgery, business, accounting, production, and the handling of machines and materials.
Sensing Plus Feeling
The SF (sensing plus feeling) people, too, rely primarily on sensing for purposes of perception, but they prefer feeling for purposes of judgment.
They approach their decisions with personal warmth because their feeling weighs how much things matter to themselves and to others.
They are more interested in facts about people than in facts about things, and, therefore, they tend to be sociable and friendly.
They are most likely to succeed and be satisfied in work where their personal warmth can be applied effectively to the immediate situation, as in pediatrics, nursing, teaching (especially elementary school), social work, selling of tangibles, and service-with-a-smile jobs.
To contrast the two types, let's look briefly at my oldest brother, older sister (I have an oldest sister but she was raised by others so I will skip over her even though she is an SF), and my babiest sister who is an SF (I am one of nine children from the same mother, seven of us have the same father.)
My oldest brother, Gabe was most satisfied working independently or with a partner. He is an ISTJ, so ST.
His favorite, ongoing occupation was buying used cars, fixing them up and reselling them at a profit.
He cared only for his success, had no problem making a large profit at the expense--to my mind--of the people from whom he bought the cars, and success to him was in besting others as well as how much money he made, so his areas--matching the description above from Gifts Differing would be "business" and "the handling of machines and material."
He has never been a people-person; lacks warmth toward others, except when used as a manipulative tool to get to his goal: success as measured by besting others and the profit he made.
Now, let's talk about my sister, Chico (a nickname) who is an ESFP.
She has always made friends easily albeit not kept most of them because of psychological problems stemming from early childhood trauma.
She has enjoyed since she was young acquiring many skills from hair dressing to art (doing so well with colored pencils and similar tools that she once made me an over-sized birthday card I thought she had bought), and is especially good at selling, and only enjoys and trusts 'hands-on' work (same as my ISTJ father, oldest brother, Gabe).
Chico sold for the love of it and did not keep detailed, accurate count of profits. (She is a P, not a J--and in this and other areas, the difference shows how vast it can be, although there are, of course, exceptions, e.g. many Ps can and do learn to do detailed bookkeeping for their home businesses if necessary.)
My older sister would sell if no one paid her, and her life, in her 50s, still mirrors the text that reads,
"They are most likely to succeed and be satisfied in work where their personal warmth can be applied effectively to the immediate situation, as in... selling of tangibles, and service-with-a-smile jobs."
[My oldest brother Gabe smiled to get the job done, not naturally drawn to people.]
Finally, my babiest sister Shelby--for a wrap-up--has worked as an elementary school teacher in a church; as a phlebotomist, then went back to school to become a nurse, and now works as an optician because the nursing proved too physically demanding and she has scoliosis.
Shelby is an ISFP and enjoyed, as a hobby, making prism-like art from pieces of cut linoleum--very detailed work, and when she was approximately 10-12 she made all her Barbie doll's clothing, sewn by hand.
Additionally, she learned American Sign Language so she could train her Beagle, Shiloh to do tricks without voice commands.
Shelby has two best friends she has kept since elementary school, and with them she is playful, trusting, open and warm, but otherwise she is more reserved with strangers, acquaintances and even many relatives.
I hope the blurb from Gifts Differing and the personal examples help you tell the difference between ST and SF, including the influence of extraversion (Chico) vs. introversion (Gabe and Shelby), i.e. degrees of warmth vs. reserve when dealing with people.
Your age, which from what you shared I am inferring is as young as 18, perhaps younger, but near this age certainly will make learning your MBTI harder, and many suggest--I am in accord--that you do more learning and less 'deciding' at this stage, especially if you are still living with your primary care givers, i.e. reliant on pleasing others who provide your shelter, clothing, and other necessities.
When you have more autonomy and life experience, your natural personality type may begin to emerge assuming, however, that you don't have "falsification of type" because the primary care givers required you to act against your natural type.
If that is the case, i.e. you have or end up seeing falsification of type in yourself, you will have to do some work to end habits that kept you safe under the control of the primary caregivers but in the future, which will then be your 'now' are hindrances.
Don't worry so much about MBTI or fitting some kind of stereotype of 'any' type.
Instead, to the extent humanly possible, within limits set by your own personality (whatever it may be), learn all you can about what interests you; go places and read about whatever gives you pleasure if it does not hurt you or others either literally or psychologically, and out of those experiences your natural tendencies will emerge stronger, more noticeably, and you may not need so much help with MBTI typing.
I'll end with one example of lack of logic in your earlier post(s):
You opened a thread asking to be typed and then provided what you knew and asserted were 'stereotypes' as well as stating that you were at least three different types, and tossing in enneagram, then following the advice of someone who suggested you check out Big Five (which has nothing to do with MBTI).
For someone who wants an 'accurate MBTI reading' that behavior is illogical.
A logical approach would be to stay within the confines of MBTI as well as "lead" with trustworthy MBTI source information, not stereotypes.
That's it for now.