[Sybyll]

I wasn't ever going to do this, but here I am...
Last time someone suggested I might be an ENTP I sort of blew up at them. Sorry, <insert username I've forgotten>!

Okay, let's do this: Lately, a lot of things have been making me question my type. I thought I was an INTP, in fact I was as sure as I get about these things, but then there was a thread comparing the two or something and I identified more with the ENTP part.

One example, from this thread:

An INTP will strive to categorize everything, pull it apart into pieces and give every piece as precise label as possible. An ENTP will try to do the opposite, take the little pieces of information thrown at him and unify it into one whole. An INTP is concerned primarily that the pieces of the puzzle are connected in a way that makes sense. An ENTP is concerned primarily with the picture the puzzle depicts when it is put together.

(although, here I am, talking about the pieces...)

Perhaps not the best one, but it was the one I remembered. Also, there was something about ENTPs being better at putting things in terms other people can understand, which I am very good at, in general.

The cognitive function test gives me this answer: Ne>Ti>Se>Fi>Fe>Ni>Si , and says I'm probably an ENTP.

What makes me doubt my INTPness the most is how I use my Fe. I remember having an ephiphany when I was 12: "Other people feel things, too :shocked:" I mean I knew before, sort of, but that's when it sort of hit home that what I said and did affected other people. Also, lately I've been trying to conciously develop Fe, which apparently you cannot do with your inferior function?

Si, on the other hand... Isn't that all about traditions and repetition? I read in the article section of the ENTP-forum that ENTP-children often want to hear the same parts of a story again and again (although I thought that was all children in general, actually), which is spot on, same with the arguing - I love a good argument (in both senses of the word, which is weird considering I'm pretty sure I'm a type 9, but the other parts of the 9 description fits me much better than that of type 5, so *shrug*) - and liking new things.

I'm awful with noticing details like spelling errors (my own, anyway), errors in math (I always, always lose a minus sign somwehere, either that or a number, and then it takes a real effort to find where I went wrong) and dirty floors and the like, the latter I usually need to have pointed out to me before I can see it. And I don't like doing things the same way they've always been done just because they've always been done like that (I feel this should be obvious, but I suspect it might not be), for example I hated, literally hated, the tradition of dancing around the christmas-tree when I was a kid and escaped into the hallway when the rest of the class did this at school. It seemed so POINTLESS and I remember working myself into a rage about the whole thing (which seems faintly ridiculous now I think about it).

Okay now on to why I think I may be an extrovert: I get energized when I share ideas with people, and love shocking people. It's the best feeling in the world when you know someone has a certain perception of you and then you just shatter that completely with one comment :crazy:. And I'm much better at telling stories if I have an audience - I've tried writing for myself, but it feels sort of pointless when I can't get input from others underway, it helps to talk the story through with a couple people - and I love brainstorming, when it works (some people are terrible at that, they frustrate me to death).

I don't really have a problem with, and sometimes even thrive, in a group situation, where the conversation bounces around from topic to topic. I remember thinking, when I was younger, how much easier conversation was with a group of three people as opposed to one-on-one.

Why I think I'm an introvert: I like talking to people one on one (even though, thinking about it, I may actually be more comfortable with a group of people sometimes, if the other person isn't a close friend), and sometimes people are tiring.

I identify like whoa with a lot of examples on the "You know you're an INTP when..." list.

I spend a lot of time by myself, I lurk a lot on forums until I think of something to say, often I think I come off as pretty quiet compared to some people, but quite outspoken compared to others.

I guess I could be an ENTP who's just barely on the E side of the E/I-sliding scale? I halfway convinced myself during this post. Still. What do you think, O wise and all-knowing internets? Any questions, answers, comments?

As an aside, WOW. This must be my longest post, ever.

 

[vel]

In my experience the T-type extraverts tend to give off this air of less extraversion in way most people think extraversion manifests itself. They are less people oriented than F-type extraverts. The ENTPs I have known tended to be either very to somewhat geeky and their extraversion was mainly related to technology rather than people. For example, one needed to get that shiny new gadget that just came out, was constantly upgrading their computers, and branched out easily into other techie hobbies. Meanwhile he had very small circle of friends. His extraversion was often driving him out to explore the world around but he had little interest in people, whom he really divided into small circle of smart people he admired and those others.

 

[RhoAlphaNuAlpha]

In my experience the T-type extraverts tend to give off this air of less extraversion in way most people think extraversion manifests itself. They are less people oriented than F-type extraverts. The ENTPs I have known tended to be either very to somewhat geeky and their extraversion was mainly related to technology rather than people. For example, one needed to get that shiny new gadget that just came out, was constantly upgrading their computers, and branched out easily into other techie hobbies. Meanwhile he had very small circle of friends. His extraversion was often driving him out to explore the world around but he had little interest in people, whom he really divided into small circle of smart people he admired and those others.

This made me laugh pretty hard, its so true.

EDIT: I realized I forgot to answer.
The deciding factor, in my opinion to what your type is, depends on cognitive functions solely.
There are many "flavors" to extroversion, some people are higher and some are lower, but most people of the same type will identify in that they all think the same way (ie: using dominant Te, or Ni, or Ne, etc)

If you think you relate to using Ne as your dominant function, with Ti secondary, you are most likely an ENTP.
I dont know if you've read the descriptions of the functions, but the best way to decide is look at Ne and Ti, think about scenarios and which you use primarily.
That should help you decide on your type.

 

[Sybyll]

This made me laugh pretty hard, its so true.

EDIT: I realized I forgot to answer.
The deciding factor, in my opinion to what your type is, depends on cognitive functions solely.
There are many "flavors" to extroversion, some people are higher and some are lower, but most people of the same type will identify in that they all think the same way (ie: using dominant Te, or Ni, or Ne, etc)

If you think you relate to using Ne as your dominant function, with Ti secondary, you are most likely an ENTP.
I dont know if you've read the descriptions of the functions, but the best way to decide is look at Ne and Ti, think about scenarios and which you use primarily.
That should help you decide on your type.

I think I've read those descriptions a thousand times. The way I understand it, your dominant function is like the lens which you views the world through, so it's hard to see it, while the secondary function is easier to identify with... But then I can see myself as having either as the dominant depending on how I look at it. Which, according to this explanation seems like a very Ne perspective.

Relevant bit of the explanation:

What distinguishes Extraverted Intuition from other attitudes, then, is the principle that all interpretations leave out some of the whole reality--and therefore every sign is opening up new information to you, showing you new paths by which to discover more about the context of that sign, and giving you new hypotheses to entertain. Every interpretation of a sign is provisional. Each interpretation reflects what you (think you) know right now, but the whole reality that the sign really reflects may be quite different from that. Nor does this process ever end. When you get new information, that suggests new possibilities; nothing is ever definitive. Nor should it be: if you ever tried to state anything definitively, you would be closing yourself off to new and interesting possibilities.

So I guess I do think Ne is my dominant function. Well, crap. I guess I'm going to join the horde of female INTPs who decided they were actually ENTPs...

Also, this example makes me lean towards me being extroverted:

Imagine that you and some friends are playing a board game together, like Monopoly.

Taking an extraverted attitude, what matters to you--what you define as being of interest to you and meriting your attention--is the game. Every thought you think is about making a move in the game. Everything you do is a move in the game. The game offers things to gain, and you attempt to gain them. If something doesn't register on the game board, where everyone can see it, it doesn't seem relevant.

But then is that how it is? I've seen so many different definitions I don't know which is the right one. Is this an accurate description of extraversion at all?

 

[vel]

I think I've read those descriptions a thousand times. The way I understand it, your dominant function is like the lens which you views the world through, so it's hard to see it, while the secondary function is easier to identify with...

hmm not so ... the primary function will be the primary driving force in your life as well as the primary defining factor for what you find interesting and what you have no interest in (find boring), it correlates to very specific manifestations of interests and behavior in physical world which you can read about in sticky threads titled "you know you are XXXX type when"

There is also the tertiary function which is different for INTPs and ENTPs. Even though it is tertiary it can actually make quite an appearance in people who are past their mid-20s. For ENTPs the tertiary function is Fe while it is the inferior function of INTPs. How this translates to real life is that the ENTPs I have known will occasionally make a stance against something that they see as upsetting to the group harmony. They are not as sensitive to arguments and put-downs directed at them, but if you start some sort of drama that upsets the entire group of people this is when they are get prompted to get upset and speak out against what you are doing. Usually they will be quite diplomatic in this, will do this publicly, and call on for group unity.

INTPs on the other hand are very rarely prompted to do this. The ones I have revolved around though are in their early 20s to mid-20s so their inferior function has no developed to any extent. And it tends to come out in somewhat crooked all or nothing manner. First of all it takes significant group conflict to rally them up. Most of it they are likely to ignore and just observe from aside. When the breaking point goes happen and they speak out against the person who has disturbed social order it is usually along the lines of "don't make me angry" with focus being more on " I am upset" with focus being on the "me" rather than "we" that ENTPs tend to use in their appeals, though you can clearly see that the issue doesn't personally involve the INTP. And they will also try to have one-on-one talks with the person rather than make public stances.

Of course why I am observant of this is because Fe is my secondary function, so decently developed, and though I see glimpses of it in both personality types, it tends to resonate more with ENTPs rather than INTPs.

 

[Sybyll]

hmm not so ...

Ok, but, this is from the Leonore Thomson Exegesis Wiki:

When people read Lenore's descriptions of types and attitudes, or even the attempts at exegesis posted on this site, they seldom recognize themselves in their dominant function. The reaction is usually something like, "Whah? Maybe sorta kinda, but this hardly seems like me."

A dominant function, after all, is your main universe of description, and a universe of description does not include itself. It's the lens, not what you see. The dominant function is so ingrained in your personality that you might think that everyone has it also. Jung says that he took a while to figure out that not everyone else was an Introverted Thinker (has anyone else seen this quote or know where it is?). Since everyone has arms, you wouldn't say "I'm a person with arms" when you describe yourself. Same with the dominant function.​

I suppose the keyword here might be Lenore's description, then. Also, I'm starting to think I should really read some books on the subject of MBTI, since it's hard to know if information on the internet is reliable.

There is also the tertiary function which is different for INTPs and ENTPs. Even though it is tertiary it can actually make quite an appearance in people who are past their mid-20s. For ENTPs the tertiary function is Fe while it is the inferior function of INTPs. How this translates to real life is that the ENTPs I have known will occasionally make a stance against something that they see as upsetting to the group harmony. They are not as sensitive to arguments and put-downs directed at them, but if you start some sort of drama that upsets the entire group of people this is when they are get prompted to get upset and speak out against what you are doing. Usually they will be quite diplomatic in this, will do this publicly, and call on for group unity.

This sounds more like what I would do (and have done, in fact, even though sometimes I realised later I should probably have done the confronting one-on-one). Did you look at my age, though? I'm not past my mid-twenties yet:wink:

 

[Miss Scarlet]

Couldn't you be borderline 50/50 I and E?

 

[Vaka]

Couldn't you be borderline 50/50 I and E?

Having Ne-Ti creates a different attitude in a person than Ti-Ne. So, I'd say it's really only one or the other.

 

[Miss Scarlet]

Having Ne-Ti creates a different attitude in a person than Ti-Ne. So, I'd say it's really only one or the other.

I thought that was something else. I'm lost now. :shocked:

 

[Sybyll]

If the type code starts with an I, that means the dominant function is introverted, while the secondary function is extroverted. If the type code starts with an E, the dominant function is extroverted while the secondary is introverted.

Function order for an INTP is Ti-Ne-Si-Fe
Function order for an ENTP is Ne-Ti-Fe-Si.

Does that clear it up any? I know I've read good explanations of this but I can't really remember where they are right now; check in the articles section of this forum, maybe?

Lara Croft, how would you describe that difference in attitude?

 

[Sybyll]

Another common myth is that all extroverts are social butterflies, high energy, talk a lot etc. again this is not always true. Being extroverted means that your lead and most stimulating way of functioning is to be engaged with the external world – depending on your dominant function, this may be a preference towards engaging directly (ExxJ) with social dynamics (Fe) or structural dynamics (Te) or taking in information (ExxP) via patterns and impressions (Ne) or literal details (Se).

Source: MBTI Types (emphasis mine)

Okay, if this is true then I am definitely an ENTP. So. Is it? It seems to make sense.

 

[vel]

Ok, but, this is from the Leonore Thomson Exegesis Wiki:

When people read Lenore's descriptions of types and attitudes, or even the attempts at exegesis posted on this site, they seldom recognize themselves in their dominant function. The reaction is usually something like, "Whah? Maybe sorta kinda, but this hardly seems like me."

A dominant function, after all, is your main universe of description, and a universe of description does not include itself. It's the lens, not what you see. The dominant function is so ingrained in your personality that you might think that everyone has it also. Jung says that he took a while to figure out that not everyone else was an Introverted Thinker (has anyone else seen this quote or know where it is?). Since everyone has arms, you wouldn't say "I'm a person with arms" when you describe yourself. Same with the dominant function.​

I suppose the keyword here might be Lenore's description, then. Also, I'm starting to think I should really read some books on the subject of MBTI, since it's hard to know if information on the internet is reliable.

I disagree that this is a case for everybody. When I read about about Ni I could definitely see it in myself. I guess it depends on how much self-reflection you have done prior to meeting MBTI theory. If you have attempted to locate patterns in your own behavior, find explanations for your own failings in life, identify your own strengths then it is quite easy to see those correlate to function descriptions.

This sounds more like what I would do (and have done, in fact, even though sometimes I realised later I should probably have done the confronting one-on-one). Did you look at my age, though? I'm not past my mid-twenties yet:wink:

I know one INTP that doesn't make an impression of a shy introvert to me. He relatively often speaks in front of the people, initiates conversations, and has no problem approaching others and asking them questions even about their personal life. He seemed to be pretty confident socially, had good communication skills, came up with some wacky ideas and liked discussing them with others. So I have in past wondered if he is a mellowed-down version of an ENTP or may be just in between the types somehow. That was until we started talking more and he started correcting me, clarifying as in "this term can only mean this and nothing else", and taking some things I have said very literally, not understanding the hyperboles and metaphors that ENTPs pick up on this very well. N is a unifying function that strives to connect pieces into one model. Frequent use of symbolism and interchange of labels on things and concepts are much more acceptable to it. Both Ti and Fi which are dominant functions for INxPs are disjointing functions, thus these people tend to be much more precise in way they communicate and would like to be communicated with. It was then that I saw that this guy was indeed an INTP but due to whatever circumstances in life he was actually quite comfortable socializing and demonstrated an interest in people (I think this was mostly because he liked sharing his ideas and being praised for them, and particular environment he was in was quite supportive of it).

 

[yesiknowbut]

The extraversion of ENTPs has to do with ideas rather than people. I quite frequently get picked as an introvert, as I am quite reserved, not so much the party animal. But I am confident I am ENTP, not INTP.

I have never had difficulty working out my primary function. It really was very familiar to me, reading about it, like "so that's what it is called and how it works! it isn't just *me*, there's a name for it!"

 

[dagnytaggart]

Couldn't you be borderline 50/50 I and E?

No. Just try putting them together, and you'll be forced to make a choice:

EI-NTP = pronounced INTP
IE-NTP = pronounced ENTP

Sounds (no pun intended) like you're set on ENTP, but this is just icing on the cake - which sound do you like better? "aye" or "ee"?

 

[Sybyll]

Sounds (no pun intended) like you're set on ENTP, but this is just icing on the cake - which sound do you like better? "aye" or "ee"?

Haha, yeah, I know; the more I read, the more I'm getting convinced that Ne is my dominant process, although I've realised I'm also trying to see how well I could argue that I'm an ENTP rather than an INTP, not quite on purpose; sort of out of reflex, I think. The confusing thing is I can argue either case convincingly to myself :dry:.

EDIT: Also, people always think I've made up my mind before I actually have, and then they're surprised when I don't do what I previously sounded so certain about. I guess I send out a vibe of certainty that I'm not really feeling.

Choosing between the English sounds for the letters makes little sense as I think in Norwegian. The pronounciation (as if you care to know this) of E is "eh", while for I it's "ee". I guess I like "eh" better though. :mellow: Oh. Was that a rhetorical question?

The extraversion of ENTPs has to do with ideas rather than people. I quite frequently get picked as an introvert, as I am quite reserved, not so much the party animal. But I am confident I am ENTP, not INTP.

I'm quite reserved, too, don't exactly go to a lot of parties or anything. I've bolded the part that's really the main reason why I think I might be ENTP even though I'm not that outgoing like a stereotypical extrovert (yeah, I know, unhealthy Extroverted Sensers... etc. etc.).

N is a unifying function that strives to connect pieces into one model. Frequent use of symbolism and interchange of labels on things and concepts are much more acceptable to it.

Yeah... Sounds more like me. Maybe? I try to be presise about what I mean, but language is really a consensus, isn't it? We agree that the word "cat" means that animal that says "meaow" and so on, so the meaning of a word is constantly changing - the purpose of language is to communicate, so I don't quite understand why people get so nitpicky about language ("no, actually, most people are wrong, that word actually means ___!" Perhaps it did originally, but now it also has *** meaning. What is the big deal?) and the "correct" meaning of words.

I don't think I'm that picky about what people call things, really, as long as I understand what they mean (unless I want to argue about something just then).